‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

AX – Google’s Open Agentic Orchestrator

666 points · 301 comments · blazarquasar

  1. sigbottle · · focus · HN ↗
    Could someone explain to me what the general workflow is now that people are converging to? I haven't really been catching up with the AI ecosystem but I was looking into agent sandboxes and VM's recently and there's a ton of these startups and tools now. Is giving the agent a temporary scratchbox really that valuable?

    I've been still just like, making VM's with proxmox, then putting my agent in the machine and letting it run free (with my dotfiles setup script making dev env pretty much free, though I could also just make a VM snapshot). What's wrong with that? Is that not the scalable solution for enterprise rn?

    1. dbmikus · · focus · HN ↗
      I'm working on something in the "cloud VMs for agents" space[1], so I have some battle scars and opinions!

      IMO, you want the flexibility to create either: (a) permanent devbox VMs, and (b) per-task VMs

      Agent sandbox platforms tend to be tuned for the latter, which sometimes involves VMM hackery for fast boot, snapshotting VM filesystem and RAM, etc.

      Some workflows are a lot simpler if the multiple agents share a VM. These are workflows where agents must share state. A simple one we have: making related changes in our public OSS repo and our private repo, and then testing the change.

      And other times you want to split up the tasks onto isolated VMs so they don't interfere with each other (ie run two dev servers without database or port collisions).

      I tweeted a bit about this (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;x.com&#x2F;dbmikus&#x2F;status&#x2F;2099264325231771878" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;x.com&#x2F;dbmikus&#x2F;status&#x2F;2099264325231771878) and had a little debate with folks about ephemeral vs persistent VMs for agents

      [1]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;gofixpoint&#x2F;amika" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;gofixpoint&#x2F;amika

      1. sroussey · · focus · HN ↗
        Why would you need multiple agents and not one agent with multiple repos?
        1. dbmikus · · focus · HN ↗
          For my example where I modify both the OSS and private repos, I sometimes have one agent coordinate both changes (maybe with subagents), or if the work is modular and separate, I have disjoint agents do the work separately.

          That said, most of the time, I only want an agent to work in one repo. I could give it multiple repos at once and instruct it to work in just one, but that risks it forgetting my instructions and it can load more context into the agent&#x27;s window.

          I think my main point was to have flexibility about the topology of VMs, repos, and agents.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.