Hacker News Reader

Comment by kevmo314 | Hacker News Reader

I don't think this is stupid, and I think the logical extension to this is agents will start writing directly to prod with fully automated code changes.

Pulling that off successfully at scale would be pretty incredible to watch.

View on HN

Your last statement holds even after removing the word "successfully".

I let my Claude write to prod in some projects. But after comitting, pushing, waiting for CI to run unit tests and build the docker image. Then it can deploy the image on k8s. Sure, it can also just run commands on the pod. But the agent benefits from the ability to rollback, identify at a glance which version is running, what has changed since then and why

We built all this tooling because it's useful. If you replace the human with an agent the tooling doesn't stop being useful. If anything it becomes more useful, since AI Agents excell at reading tool output but struggle with maintaining long-term state

That's because we're in a world where the human and agent make mistakes. But think about the world where the agent doesn't make any mistakes anymore and doesn't need to rollback or figure out what has changed.

So agent would have reached perfection. I'm not sure humans can create a machine capable of perfection. This is a philosophical question waiting for a definitive answer.

I don't think we will reach a world where agents make no mistakes. Because there are always tradeoffs. So an agent could choose the "wrong" tradeoff and we call that a "mistake", but is that really a "mistake"? Arguably not

If the agent is able to make fewer mistakes but chose the wrong tradeoff it will be faster to fix forward than to look back, figure out why it happened, dig out the rollback, and then figure out how to change the decision.

No it won’t.

Or humans just prompt wrong thing or people actually don’t like feature.

Lisp machines finally vindicated. Took only 40 years and a historic paradigm shift

Reply on news.ycombinator.com