The devices are entirely open for all practical purposes - but worrying about individual cameras is silly, because they have no meaningful security at all around the API's to access all the cloud data - you can buy law enforcement credentials dirt cheap in dark web marketplaces to log in and track anyone/anywhere you want and access all footage.
Our agents automatically review our PR's - the authors agents automatically see the feedback and make fixes, and automatically merge when everything is green.
A well authored CI review process is significantly better than any human could do. We have the AI review not only the changes but clone and investigate all related repositories that integrate with the code to evaluate interactions, check all open and historical issues that may be related, review production/development logs for the feature, etc.
It will then also go update issues/tasks to reflect the changes after the merge.
Similarly you can have automated agents watching post-deployment to mitigate risk in the "a new feature just went out" time-frame. Just having someone check the related logs in the hours after deployment can catch a lot of issues that otherwise would turn into a fire-drill.
My question as well. Why is this happening in ci/ci? Why aren't contributors performing the automated review and correction step locally?
The only answer I can imagine is that it supports reviewing patches from people who aren't using AI or review by humans but parent doesn't mention this.
Must be a token burner setup. Nice if you really got it to work. Now also add business agents that come up with new features based on actual research. Your automated humanless company is almost there.
They're making money, which is more than most ICs living in cost centers can say.
The human code monkey sometimes thinks too highly of the task of coding. That's never once been the job to be done.
Every engineer is going to become a master of understanding and measuring need, opportunity cost, organizational support and headwinds, political will, etc. These are the true features of the job. The coding part will fall away entirely.
Deliver value. Code used to be the expensive part, but now it's becoming cheap, fungible, and ephemeral.
...of course you're likely just trolling, hard to say with the drivel coming out of Silicon Valley the last few years. In that case: my apologies and keep up the good work :D
This is where we landed too. It works remarkably well. AI guidance is really the crucial thing here. I know a lot of people don't like this, think it's really bad, think it just results in slop... but it doesn't or at least never results in dead end slop. If you find what you get out of AI is weak in some area, then get it to focus on making sure that it does a better job, give it more guardrails / guidance etc till you are happy with the result.
Feels like a manager with no branding skills had an initial “vision” and everyone working there probably hoped marketing/branding would get pulled in later.
Ironically, having never been flagged - I've just restarted Claude Desktop and it's flagged a conversation that has already been completed.
In a long session pulling data from all over the place it created a pretty PDF.
"create this as a google doc that can be commented on"
Done — the full v0.5 content is now a Google Doc in your Drive...
"Ah, the formatting has gone. Do it in google slides please"
The brand studio has a native Google Slides path for exactly this — building the deck now.
Google Slides created.
Then today:
Chat paused
Edit and retry with Fable 5
Fable 5's safeguards flagged this message. This sometimes happens with safe, normal conversations. Continue with Opus 4.8, send feedback, or learn more.
It wasn't really worth exploring last year either.
For your use case n8n may be a good fit, and Claude or Codex will be happy to set it up for you.
If you want this "messenger interface with computers for the agents" feature set Grok Bot is quite good and effortless to use. With Tailscale configured on its personal VM it can connect to machines on your network easily.
The exponential growth they are having right now is absolutely insane. I would caution against assuming its an easy problem, or that anyone else has demonstrated an ability to handle this level of scale/growth any better.
In May they had to solve for 30x growth overnight, and I would guess its closer to 100x by now. The reality is a centralized solution like this may no longer be a viable option with the scale of code generation.
Github definitely didn't 100x its paying customers, and Github Copilot doesn't seem to have any serious users. Should we really be calling it growth when revenue is flat but server load is exploding due to everyone and their cat vibecoding dozens of throwaway weekend projects?
If Github didn't have insane margins before, they are definitely hemorrhaging money now. If they want to survive they have to introduce strict rate limits and 10x "Vibecoder" pricing tier sooner rather than later - but I bet Microsoft won't let them because it would hurt their already-bad AI revenue...
reply