I do sometimes wonder if we are all writing more than we would if we just wrote the code ourselves.
I am asking that partially as a rhetorical question but also wondering your thoughts on when to deploy 'loop engineering' versus 'one-shot' versus writing the code yourself.
Additionally the post seems to talk in broad strokes without a specific proposal on a 'scorer' / determining adherence to the state goal. Do you have a thought on how that should be expressed? Do you feel that a human in the loop slows things down unnecessarily?
This makes sense, but boy would it be easy to mix up something like this with some fancy graphics and sell some snake oil. Stuff that sounds like
"What is therefore required is not merely a more capable agent, but a closed-loop capability orchestration substrate capable of continuously reconciling observed product reality against an evolving demand manifold."
fancy words; it's true, though ~ i think it was clear from the moment LLMs entered the scene that (if) one day they would be able to write code ~ then the real challenge would be to integrate the output into our organizations ~ and this integration would not work without changing the orgs
I am asking that partially as a rhetorical question but also wondering your thoughts on when to deploy 'loop engineering' versus 'one-shot' versus writing the code yourself.
Additionally the post seems to talk in broad strokes without a specific proposal on a 'scorer' / determining adherence to the state goal. Do you have a thought on how that should be expressed? Do you feel that a human in the loop slows things down unnecessarily?
reply