‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

MCP was always a bad idea?

335 points · 331 comments · maharshi365

  1. docheinestages · · focus · HN ↗
    The premise of the article is that the Model Context Protocol (spelling it out to emphasize the core purpose) is inefficient in its current form. We can agree to that.

    Now, does it mean agents don't need a protocol to connect to a server and discover its capabilities, tools, and distributed skills? I disagree.

    > Agents with terminal access can replace most MCP servers

    What should all other agents that don't have terminal access do?

    1. gmueckl · · focus · HN ↗
      Also, terminal access is extremely powerful on its own. Why should an agent even get access to that? I see it as a potential violation of least privileges.
      1. lelanthran · · focus · HN ↗
        > Also, terminal access is extremely powerful on its own. Why should an agent even get access to that? I see it as a potential violation of least privileges.

        When even the official software from the token providers have never had human eyes on 800kSLoC, I'm afraid that ship has sailed: the principle of least privileges has already been ravaged to hell and back.

        Sealing a pin-prick hole in a dam wall is pointless if half the dam has already been washed away.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.