You might want to study the history of technology and how rapidly compute efficiency has increased as well as how quickly the models are improving.
In this context, assuming that humans will still be able to do high level planning anywhere near as well as an AI, say 3-5 years out, is almost ludicrous.
Absolutely the wrong take. We MUST think about what might happen in several years. Anyone who says we shouldn’t is not thinking about this technology correctly. I work on AI tech. I think about these things. If the teams at Microsoft or GitHub are not, then we should be pushing them to do so.
He asked that in the context of an actual specific project. It did not make sense way he asked it. And it's the executive's to plan that out five years down the line.. although I guarantee you none of them are trying to predict that far.
At the moment, we're using Claude 3.7 Sonnet, but we're keeping our options open to change the model down the line, and potentially even to introduce a model picker like we have for Copilot Chat and Agent Mode.
Using different models for different tasks is extremely useful and I couldn't imagine going back to using just one model for everything. Sometimes a model will struggle for one reason or another and swapping it out for another model mid-conversation in LibreChat will get me better results.
This is a direct threat to Cursor. The smarter the models get, the less often programmers really need to dig into an IDE, even one with AI in it. Give it a couple of years and there will be a lot of projects that were done just by assigning tasks where no one even opened Cursor or anything.
I think they mentioned it was a similar environment to what it trains on, so maybe they have a default Dockerfile. Of course containers can also install additional packages or at least python packages.
I don't think jobs are necessarily a good plan at all anymore. Figure out how to leverage AIs and robots as cheap labor, and sell services or products. But if someone is trying to get a job, I get the impression that networking helps more than anything.
Yeah, the value of the typical job application meta is trending to zero very quickly. Entrepreneurship has a steep learning curve; you should start learning it as soon as possible. Don't waste your time learning to run a straight line - we're entering off-road territory.
As someone who works on his own open source agent framework/UI (https://github.com/runvnc/mindroot), it's kind of interesting how announcements from vendors tend to mirror features that I am working on.
For example, in the last month or so, I added a job queue plugin. The ability to run multiple tasks that they demoed today is quite similar. The issue I ran into with users is that without Enterprise plans, complex tasks run into rate limits when trying to run concurrently.
So I am adding an ability to have multiple queues, with each possibly using different models and/or providers, to get around rate limits.
By the way, my system has features that are somewhat similar not only to this tool they are showing but also things like Manus. It is quite rough around the edges though because I am doing 100% of it myself.
But it is MIT Licensed and it would be great if any developer on the planet wanted to contribute anything.
I don't care how many times I am violently buried on this site for mentioning the word -- but cryptocurrency makes traditional banking obsolete. Or should have.
After almost two decades my guess is we can start to look back at the whole cryptocurrency thing a bit more clearly.
> but cryptocurrency makes traditional banking obsolete.
Most banks we interact with were obsolete before crypto.
When working there I had a lot of "why" questions until someone explained me "You need to think about banks basically as an extension of the state".
From a tech POV it is exactly what we usually hear: there is a ~50 year old legacy core banking system that nobody really understand but keep working almost miraculously. Everything else beyond that is trash.
Cryptocurrencies pop up in a weird way and obliviously did not delivered since.
In 2025, it is still hard and costly to transact on Bitcoin or Ethereum. If it wasn't govs would have unleashed the fury on crypto.
> Or should have.
Yes our banking system is failing society and preventing progress since at least 2008.
Crypto was our chance to move beyond but it didn't happen. Bitcoin price is probably just reflect the fact that our banking system is at risk of collapsing any time soon and crypto might be (part of) the solution.
> I don't care how many times I am violently buried on this site for mentioning the word
Yes crypto shouldn't be taboo on HN. It is a potential solution for what most people need urgently (more than AI) so it should be discussed.
Since we're on the topic of authentication, how about the fact that they are not recoverable? You cannot reset a password on the blockchain, nor can you call the blockchain and prove you are the rightful owner of any inaccessible/stolen funds, nor can you take the blockchain to court to return your funds. You are SOL.
Just about any service that banks do are great examples of other things that math itself cannot do for you. These are all reasons that people still overwhelmingly use banks.
Banks do work to integrate with other societal systems in meatspace, build infrastructure, manage exceptions, comply with legal expectations, provide service, build and maintain partnerships, etc. Cryptographic ledgers don't do any of this, they are inanimate.
Hm. There are some things that banks do then that math can't do. But advanced cryptocurrencies have smart contracts that allow DeFi systems to handle many typical banking functions.
The primary things that people use them for, to store money or sometimes distribute it, or act as a system of record, have been made obsolete though.
In this context, assuming that humans will still be able to do high level planning anywhere near as well as an AI, say 3-5 years out, is almost ludicrous.
reply