Berthd
berthd.app
[23 comments hidden]
Clearly we do not yet feel satisfied with the way we consume and work with agents at scale.
It looks like perhaps rather than skinning we need a more novel UX or workflow to emerge.
I can't help but think all of this is living on borrowed time and eventually it will look more like talking to your "assistant" that fields everything for you and maybe some new async interruption model that fits humans better.
Biggest bottleneck in my opinion still is how to solve for information density.
[22 comments hidden]
Even with a single instance of Claude Code, running I am producing so much code that it is impossible to even self-review.
Can we please focus on that?
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
I sort of get what you're going for maybe? In a sense these things are gonna evolve at a rate where we are not going to be able to operate at their plane and we will need a sort of UX translation
[18 comments hidden]
[8 comments hidden]
If it works as desired then ship it; if it doesn't then iterate until it does.
[hidden]
Why ask obvious things?
[8 comments hidden]
[5 comments hidden]
[3 comments hidden]
I have a homelab-type setup with macOS, phone, and ARM and x64 Linux platforms, all of which I can dispatch agent work to from my laptop from, like, an airplane.
It's extremely useful, scales up the number of experiments I can run, and decouples me from my dev laptop. But it's also just table stakes at this point.
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
My real belief about this stuff is that these things are all light sabers: developers are just going to build their own.
[2 comments hidden]
[3 comments hidden]
[3 comments hidden]
What is a box? Sorry is that a remote VM? A local VM that stays awake when the laptop screen is closed?
[5 comments hidden]
[hidden]
[4 comments hidden]
[3 comments hidden]
Your Mac will now work while the lid is closed.
[hidden]
But it might be nice to have a nice way to run VMs on my Mac mini, too.
[2 comments hidden]
[3 comments hidden]
"One line. A worktree, a box, an agent." Fuck does that mean?
Have some pride and actually write the text yourself. Tell my why it's interesting. What problems are you trying to solve?
If you can't be bothered to write it, why should I be bothered to read it.
[hidden]
[hidden]
(similar)
[hidden]
[hidden]
[hidden]
[hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
[3 comments hidden]
[hidden]
[hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
What an incredible gift to build this as an open source project. Thank you and I'm excited to give it a try!
[hidden]
[hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
The quality bar is quite low these days.
impulser_[10 comments hidden]
Cursor, Devin, Factory, Amp Code, Codex, Claude Codex, Antigravity, Conductor, OpenCode, T3 Code, Orca, Emdash, and hundreds of more of the same exact shit.
Yeah they might market it same fancy revolutionary technology like Orbs, but it not it just an agent harness local or remote. You can do orbs literally with Claude Code with a single prompt it not special.
We have AI that lets you build things freely and yet here we are all building the same exact thing.
This is just coding harness. The personal assistant space is the exact same.
personjerry[5 comments hidden]
hmokiguess[2 comments hidden]
jr3592[hidden]
impulser_[2 comments hidden]
Agents running in a remote vm.
iririririr[hidden]
jr3592[4 comments hidden]
Your idea and how well you can execute on it, i.e. how well you understand the problem space, is what has always mattered.
Coding being so easy now has just pulled back the curtain and shown the world that software developers really don't have much left to contribute. It's been done, a thousandfold.
rtpg[3 comments hidden]
> Coding being so easy now has just pulled back the curtain and shown the world that software developers really don't have much left to contribute. It's been done, a thousandfold.
Maybe, but I feel like there's a reason that the "useful" AI-generated work all seems to come from people who could get to the same result given "infinite" time anyways.
AI tool usage reflects and amplifies your own skill sets IMO, and I think it's pretty hard to be amazing at software architecture design but be bad at coding.
fzeindl[2 comments hidden]
I don’t agree with this at all. There still tons of buggy software around, and we ship multi-gigabyte electron installs that make fanspeeds go high and are way less efficient than software written 20 years ago.
Also the largest problem of AI written code is that is so hard to maintain, so no, coding is not the easy part.
I think it is the other way round. Building requirements from many sources of data and view points is the easy part. Implementing great, maintainable systems out of them needs specialists.
rtpg[hidden]
I am also dissatisfied at the current state of software so feel your pain. I think it's just that like .... I think if you can't get the code right you're probably not getting the requirements etc right either.