Thread

1. cs1996 · 1791065096 · focus · HN ↗

   After reading the rules and thinking about what I can use it finally hit me: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;entire.io&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;entire.io&#x2F; this is basically design a better entire.io system using CF and NOT git but they want multi agents and they want that history of what and why the agents did that really isn&#x27;t source code. And doesn&#x27;t belong in git.

   1. christophilus · 1791065144 · focus · HN ↗

      It could live in git commit comments, though.

      1. yourapostasy · 1791108817 · focus · HN ↗

         I doubt an agent-forward git should position the agent collaboration locus of data and control structures within git itself. Even when distributed, git commit messages are a one-way street if you want hash stability (critical property for agent collaboration).

         Even when we cram the collaboration ledger into git notes, git&#x27;s optimistic locking still breaks down in a thundering herd scenario, which is now easy to spin up in a git-centric agent collaboration scenario. I think the decision ledger in git needs to stay separate from the collaboration ledger, and both need massive elastic scaling capabilities when we as an industry are still used to thinking of scaling in a pre-agentic world. Think what happens when in the near future non-technical users are the dominant users of fleets of agents, they are virally connected in a social media frenzy, and descend upon a repo. Billions of concurrent agents all trying to do something with a repo and affiliated forks, are not hard to imagine in such a scenario.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.