I hopped into this hoping it would land where it did! I recently built in basic observations about cyclomatic complexity, churn, and authorship into an 'analysis' view of codebases in ouijit[1].
Some benefits can be reaped immediately (cyclomatic complexity), but others emerge over time (churn). A good example of this is say something like a 500 line file that has experienced 2500 lines of churn, and if that rate of churn is trending down or up. Surprisingly useful for understanding you've got a hotspot with an opportunity to pay down debt by spending more time on API design, or just breaking out whatever subset of the code is experiencing thrash.
The funny thing about complexity is that assuming you're lintting/formatting well, you can do a poor mans check by just looking at something like average indentation per line, deepest line, etc.
Yeah, this whole area of UX scares me. Silent speech techniques could strike a balance, but it seems obvious it wont stop there - consider what a state actor would do if they could skip interrogation altogether?
Unfortunately I think this is inevitable because as a species we perform a steady march toward collective desires for items of science fiction, so start your adversarial double-think practice now.
Is it really collective desire or are these products being pushed upon us? And why does it always have to be the dystopic "destroying human nature and society as we know it" science fiction and not the utopic "everyone lived happily ever after" science fiction? Or does it just feel that way to me?
Based on the HN “realists” I routinely see in comments, I expect it will go something like this:
I’m generally pro-privacy, but here’s the hard truth: at my startup, we disabled keyboard input in our app Slopgen and switched the default to Conduit Thought Input™, and only 2% of users bothered to navigate the 17 submenus and submit their SSN and face scan to re-enable typing. Yep, 2%, that’s all.
DAUs only decreased by ≈11%, but our ARR is already up 170% thanks to our AdThink™ revenue sharing agreement, and only 1% of users argued with our Fin.ai bot for the 45 minutes needed give a thumbs down feedback about the change.
Let’s face it: talk is cheap but users *want* these features, revealed preference *always* tells the real story. Better get used to it now or get left behind.
For a utopia to exist, everything has to go right. Dystopias are almost all modelled on some existing facet of human behaviour. Naturally one state is unstable as it requires practically complete co-operation in most cases while the other one is stable as it usually exists as some sort of undesirable equilibrium between competing forces.
Desire is probably the wrong word, fixation is more accurate. Like the skiing advice that you shouldn't look at things (trees) that you want to avoid.
As for Utopias/Dystopias, I don't know how to answer that without waxing poetic about ideas like chaos being the natural order, or beauty being in the eye of the beholder, <insert other platitude>.
> Some tools have started making licenses that are free for individuals and startups but cost money for profitable companies.
Ive seen this as well, but at a certain point it just seems like if your code is online, someones either taking it wholesale or recreating core pieces from the spec regardless of any licensing.
Its a tough time to be building OSS if you don't have distribution solved AKA some pedigree from the before times.
So, I'm a subscriber/user of exe.dev but even so I was a bit disappointed when the meat.dev tool linked in the article had no screenshots/meaningful docs. So I installed it and was bummed to see it only supported openAI and exe.dev llm integration by default. "You can just fork" - yeah I know, so take it with a grain of salt.
That aside aside, I agree. Since reading this article yesterday I've probably been overthinking an MIT from AGPL license switch for my own project Ouijit (shill time: https://ouijit.com). Its feels a little counterintuitive since AGPL encourages more open source downstream, but at the same time if I have solved some problem other agent harness devs are curious about, I just want them to take the solution without worrying about paying it back/forward.
FWIW the first version of meat was based on anthropic models, I switched to Oai models because they are faster and just as good right now. This is an astonishing thing to say, but the switch was a single shot prompt using a frontier model. I’m happy to add some selector there, but that is also the point of this article: do you really need me to make it configurable when you can switch the tool over to Anthropic with a single prompt? It’s a strange new world we live in.
On the website: you’re right. I have some side-by-side diff examples I want to turn into a website. I am just short on hours in the day. My real goal is to make the tool compelling enough that I can convince my colleagues that we should build it into Shelley. :)
Website not even needed! Janky terminal screenshot in the repo would have been good enough for me lol.
On another note, the reason I was perusing the blog was because I was curious about more of how exe handles review/quality/testing because you mentioned there being no code review in another post about stripe billings (maybe a different author). So consider this a casual request for more content on reducing delivery bottlenecks :)
At my work we found lots of these types of memories to be tightly coupled to individual workflows and preferences, and shared things tended to be enforceable by other means (tests/types/linting/review gates). For anything that had team wide alignment, it's hard for me to imagine putting in some 3rd party platform as opposed to committed somewhere or a part of internal mcp tooling.
Agreed. We started out with that actually at my company. I created a repo that defined our systems taxonomy, how things relate to each other, glossary of terms, etc. Then created an internal MCP to sit in front of it for everyone's agents to use. It did very well initially but eventually became a pretty big burden to maintain especially for the non-technical team members that are not used to the git process for making updates. I wanted to create something that allowed the rest of the non-technical folks to easily contribute to our teams source of truth. Now in memsprout they have their own spaces they create and own so they can manage when, what, and with whom their context is shared.
Market screening means looking for specific trading signals. For instance, day traders filter for stocks or crypto with high trading volume for liquidity.
You don't need funding or teams to make these types of tools anymore, they are all basically engineering as marketing for running agents in the cloud, or some other value add/funnel into something that could make money.
I recommend everyone build their own. It's fun, you'll learn a bit, and assuming you work as a software engineer the dogfooding is built in. I built ouijit as my own example of this: https://ouijit.com & https://github.com/ouijit/ouijit (note that I am not trying to make money, just free as in libre AND beer)
First hearing of tangled, tried signing up and this first time user experience needs to be tightened up. Currently unwilling to sign in because of the friction I ran into using a password manager. From what it looks like they:
- ask you for an email
- send you an email
- ask you for a username
- except you cant actually log in with this username directly
- im being forced to learn some new social url protocol
- why does the auth flow pass me through a new ui/url that seems owned by the project but visually disconnected (eg, different branding/colors for the form)
- my password manager couldnt bridge the gap
I'm notoriously fickle about dealing with signup/login friction, but the project sounds cool so hopefully my feedback is more actionable than curmudgeony.
Fwiw the sign up/in process for me was "click login, type in my existing blue sky handle, type in my password (into a bsky domain name login prompt), click authorize".
I expect that's the... more optimized flow at this point in this forge's life.
> - why does the auth flow pass me through a new ui/url that seems owned by the project but visually disconnected (eg, different branding/colors for the form)
Probably because of the above, identity isn't tightly associated with the app you're using here so they've stood up their own infra for it but probably not spent too much time on making it good.
> - except you cant actually log in with this username directly
Really? That's strange... I haven't made a native account... what do you need to login with then?
That's your handle and it points to the server where your atproto account's data is stored. You can use this same login for other atproto apps and it will all be stored on the server at tngl.sh A username.bsky.social handle just means bsky set up that account and your data lives at the bsky.social PDS. You can migrate to a different PDS and change your handle if you don't trust them. You can host a PDS yourself if you like. I agree it's a little clumsy, but I'm sure friction can be reduced.
The idea is to give users control over their identity, network, and feeds instead of big social platforms like facebook or twitter that choose what content you see and lock you into their closed network.
Some benefits can be reaped immediately (cyclomatic complexity), but others emerge over time (churn). A good example of this is say something like a 500 line file that has experienced 2500 lines of churn, and if that rate of churn is trending down or up. Surprisingly useful for understanding you've got a hotspot with an opportunity to pay down debt by spending more time on API design, or just breaking out whatever subset of the code is experiencing thrash.
The funny thing about complexity is that assuming you're lintting/formatting well, you can do a poor mans check by just looking at something like average indentation per line, deepest line, etc.
[1]: https://ouijit.com
reply