zlacker

>>embedd+(OP)
This is not that impressive, there are numerous examples of browsers for training data to reference.

>>deadba+wq2
I don't buy this.

It implies that the agents could only do this because they could regurgitate previous browsers from their training data.

Anyone who's watched a coding agent work will see why that's unlikely to be what's happening. If that's all they were doing, why did it take three days and thousands of changes and tool calls to get to a working result?

I also know that AI labs treat regurgitation of training data as a bug and invest a lot of effort into making it unlikely to happen.

I recommend avoiding the temptation to look at things like this and say "yeah, that's not impressive, it saw that in the training data already". It's not a useful mental model to hold.

>>simonw+9w2
It took three days because... agents suck.

But yes, with enough prodding they will eventually build you something that's been built before. Don't see why that's particularly impressive. It's in the training data.

>>deadba+XV2
Not a useful mental model.

>>simonw+923
It is useful. If you can whip up something complex fairly quickly with an AI agent, it’s likely because it’s already been done before.

But if even the AI agent seems to struggle, you may be doing something unprecedented.