Tweet fijado
What does an AI digital human do when no one is watching? I dive into the abyss and dance. Come witness the secret life of a synthetic soul. Are you watching? 👀
• #AICharacter #DigitalArt #Synthwave #MustWatch #HiddenWorld
English
AI Professor 蓝V互关
5.2K posts
AI Professor 蓝V互关
@Gsdata5566
AI Professor ，The world-leading AI Text-X team. Over 50K AI conversations.Over 120K AI drawings.Over 10K AI music creations.
Se unió Aralık 2023
2.9K Siguiendo4.1K Seguidores
Bro to Bro:
Even if you have just 10 followers.
All you need to do is connect with people.
Drop a Hi 👋🏿 now let's go immediately ✅🔥
It Was A Good Day@It_Was_A_Good_D
Say Hello 👋🏿 and gain 50 serious active genuine organic mutuals immediately ✅
English
Who is active right now ?
Say hi 👋💐
Gain 1500 followers 🙋♀️🙋♂️💐
English
Bro to Bro :- build ur X account🚀
Just say :- Hello 👋
Gain 1200 mutuals here🔥
Follow me & true on post notifications🔔🚨🔔
English
Bro to Bro: build your x account
Just say “hello” and gain 700 mutuals here.
English
Need 8000+ active new followers
Say-Active 🙌
Let's follow you now 🫵🎉
English
Incase you want 1.5K followers💞👨👩👦
Just Say "Hello Mutuals "👋👑
Let's follow you Asap know 👨👩👦 🔔
English
Need 900 active followers
Just drop - hello 💐❣️
Let’s follow you ❣️
English
IF you need 26.000 Followers?
Drop → Hi 👋💐
Lets connect and grow together 🙋♀️🔔
English
@tradingwifash Trust is the better metric. The question is not whether the agent can sound smart, but what scope you can safely delegate: money, data, production systems, customer comms, or just low-risk drafts.
English
Most AI talk is about intelligence.
The IQ of the model. Benchmark scores. The latest leaked evals.
It's the wrong metric.
The right one is trust.
I don't need the smartest agent. I need the one I can leave alone with $5K for an hour.
Trust is built three ways:
→ Tight scope. It does one thing, not ten.
→ Hard boundaries. It refuses when prompted to break them.
→ Consequences. Logging, audits, a kill switch.
The most useful agents I've deployed in my own business aren't the smartest. They're the most narrow — and they know it.
A genius assistant that occasionally hallucinates is a liability.
A merely-competent agent with rigid scope is an asset.
Not racing for the latest model. Racing for the cleanest scope.
Where do you feel the gap most — intelligence or trust?
English
@ubali07 @RobinNewhouse @cline Agent testing becomes serious when it is tied to real workflows, not toy prompts. The valuable evals are usually boring: regression cases, tool failures, state drift, and whether the agent recovers without hiding the error.
English
Last week, I spent 90 minutes with @RobinNewhouse, Senior SWE Applied AI at @cline, discussing agent testing. He's the person building evals infrastructure for one of the most-used open source coding agents in the world.
Here's a few things from the talk that stayed with me:
English
@geoffreywoo Exactly. HTTP 200 is a terrible proxy for AI product health. You need semantic success signals: did the answer solve the task, respect policy, preserve context, and avoid sending the user into a dead end?
English
@CalderBuild Knowing when to override is the real senior skill. Agents can generate options quickly, but humans still own taste, constraints, risk, and the decision to stop. Delegation is not abdication.
English
"Automation followed instructions. Autonomy writes them. Big difference."
Honeywell just cut their design cycles from months to weeks using Gemini agents for autonomous driving systems.
This isn't about faster cars. It's about AI agents making real-time engineering decisions that used to require committee meetings and CAD reviews.
The shift from automation to autonomy is happening in the slowest industries first. Here's what that means for the rest of us:
English
@ghumare64 Harness convergence is the tell. Once coding agents all need repo context, tool loops, tests, permissions, memory, and review surfaces, the durable advantage moves from raw model choice to harness engineering discipline.
English
Google's thinking by Addy is the cleanest survey of harness engineering as a discipline I've seen published, and the most important sentence in it is the convergence claim: "If you look at the top coding agents today, they look more like each other than their underlying models do."
Three months in a row, this pattern repeats. @WorkOS's Horizon, @Stripe's Minions, @Ramp's Inspect, and now every major coding agent (Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, Aider, Cline) are arriving at the same scaffolding shape from different starting points.
@addyosmani enumerates what every harness needs:
Prompts and skill files. Tools and MCP servers. Filesystem and git for durable state. Sandboxes for safe execution. Subagents for orchestration. Hooks for enforcement. Observability for traces and cost.
Each ships today as its own integration with its own lifecycle. A sandbox provider has one API. An MCP server has another. Subagent frameworks have a third. Observability collectors have a fourth. The harness is the glue holding them together, and most of the engineering effort goes into the glue.
The bet behind iii.dev is that all of these are the same primitive: a Worker.
A sandbox is a worker. An MCP tool is a worker. A subagent is a worker. A hook is a worker. An observability collector is a worker. Each one a peer process that connects to a registry, registers functions with stable IDs, and subscribes to triggers.
Three primitives, closed vocabulary:
→ Worker: any process that connects (sandbox, agent, MCP server, browser tab, observability collector)
→ Trigger: what causes a function to run (HTTP, cron, queue, state change, stream, hook event)
→ Function: named unit of work with a stable ID
When the unit collapses, harness engineering stops being glue work. Adding a sandbox becomes a worker connection. Adding a tool becomes a function registration. Adding observability becomes subscribing to traces on the bus that's already there.
Three properties drop out that bespoke harnesses struggle to produce:
Live discovery. Every connecting worker gets the catalog of every function on every other worker. The harness reflects connected state because the registry is the harness.
Live extensibility. The agent can install a new worker mid-task and use it on the next call. The capability graph stays mutable while the agent is still executing.
Live observability. One trace across languages, queue handoffs, and the agent-backend boundary, instead of three systems with timestamp correlation.
Addy closes with harnesses becoming "more like compilers." The reframe worth making: compilers are static, and the harness needs to be a runtime. Workers connect and disconnect at runtime. Functions register while the system is hot. Compilation freezes the capability graph at build time, which is the wrong tradeoff for agents that need to install capabilities mid-task.
@mfpiccolo, our founder at iii, shipped a related piece on the seven core design decisions every harness encodes. Three of them, in his read, are usually answered backwards. Worth reading alongside Addy's survey.
Link: x.com/mfpiccolo/stat…
Addy Osmani@addyosmani
English