Mitchell Troyanovsky@mitch_troy
@DKThomp The two pillars of @pkedrosky's argument are fundamentally flawed.
1. "Orchestration improvements have driven capabilities, rather than model improvements".
Wrong!
Claude code/Codex are really good now BECAUSE of model improvements. This whole idea of investing at the orchestration layer is a lack of understanding. Yes there are innovations there, but most of the improvements are from models getting smarter at regulating their own state & exploring their environment NOT from harnesses
2. "Outside of coding, knowledge work is token compressive. so it creates less tokens than more"
Wrong!
Even in engineering many times the hardest things are not writing MORE code. it's making hard decisions. It can take a HUGE amount of tokens to eventually write 2 lines of code because of the work in planning, iterating, validating etc. The whole quote of "sorry I wrote such a long letter, I didn't have time to write a shorter one" applies here.
In other domains, and we run agents for accounting, the work is extremely token intensive because you are paying people like Basis for accuracy and competency and as models get smarter you can spend order of magnitude MORE tokens to reach a decision or take an action that is good even if that action itself is few tokens.