9,323 karma · joined April 11, 2011
My name is Dan Mazzini and I've got a long and varied career in tech, mostly as a software developer, team leader, engineering manager, and founder. Right now I'm open to part time or short term remote contract work as an senior full-stack Rails developer.
My latest personal project: https://chess.braimax.com/
A couple of free projects I published:
https://github.com/danmaz74/ABalytics
http://bit.ly/HNMarkAllRead
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/danmaz74/
Contact: dan@thinklateral.eu
On the contrary, I would say that higher TPS would make humans in the loop much more productive, because the current long wait times mean that you lose focus and flow.
What you're thinking about is the "single market" - which, even if the name could deceive, also applies to people, including the right to go work anywhere within the single market for citizens of single market countries. Which is what many brits always hated, as they wanted single market for services and goods, but not for people.
Single market doesn't imply Schengen though - eg I as an EU citizen have the right to move to Ireland for work, but I still need to go through border checks as Ireland is outside of Schengen (because they have free movement with NI).
For sure, doing it for all users would be economically unfeasible. I wonder if the labs are experimenting with something similar, though.
The RL phase is the most similar mechanism I know of that comes to my mind, but I'm not sure it could be adapted to fill that gap.
My totally unsubstantiated theory is that this is the missing link towards what most humans would consider AGI. I don't see this as intractable, but it may require some substantial change in architecture.
PS Chinese companies were (and probably still are, when they can) stealing IP, just like the USA did when it had more IP to steal from Europe than to protect from others. Western companies were very happy to let that happen when in exchange they could make more profits in the short term by using cheap Chinese labor and infrastructure.
Which bet?
By the way, if you're not doing that yet, something that can really help when doing UI/UX work is to have the agent create some mockups, and then tests based on those - I'm using Cucumber with some extra sauce for this. It's a very nice way to guide the agent in a falsifiable way.
But seriously, if you care, this is just like using an existing library to do the lower level development work which I think is already pretty well done by the existing agents. It's not a design decision.
Summarizing it a lot, what it does is:
* help you make better plans
* split plans into iterations, in a module-aware way for projects which have strict modularity (for now I'm doing this specifically with TypeScript and dependency cruiser) - this helps a lot when a project becomes complex
* ask an agent to implement an iteration, and then programmatically run a lot of checks after each iteration - not just regression tests, but also checks against project principles and conventions
* when possible, automatically fix deviations; when not possible, raise them to myself for an end-of-plan review
In this way, instead of having to constantly be engaged with the chat interface, with all the shorter or longer wait times which break my flow, I spend a lot of highly focused time during initial planning and final review. A plan implementation can go on for hours, and the various anchoring mechanisms added to the tool keep drift to a minimum.
At some point I'm planning to release this tool as open source. As this is the result of months of trial and errors, dogfooding, and vibecoding on the tool itself, the codebase is chaotic and the UI is still full of experiments I mostly basically abandoned, and I'm not used to releasing stuff in this status. But perhaps, in this brave new world, I should just do it and see what happens?