Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | ecares's commentslogin

They really don't. I was recently approached by a journalist working on a piece on that exact topic.

Any insights?

Tolmo | multiple roles | San Francisco, Ca, USA | ONSITE | Full time

I am hiring for multiple roles in cybersecurity x AI [1]

We have security research and fullstack engineer (platform, product).

We are hiring in SF in office only at this point.

Candidating is one form away[2]

[1] https://tolmo.com/about/careers/ [2] https://jobs.ashbyhq.com/tolmo/form/website-generic


I am tired of "built in Rust" as an argument, you are spot on, it should not matter. But you are shooting right at Rust culture here haha


And I'm tired of the "tired of 'built in Rust'" arguments because it also shouldn't matter if someone happens to describe their project that you didn't have to go out of your way to talk about in a way that bothers you. But I'm shooting right at the "tired of 'built in Rust'" culture here.

You can take these arguments to an unbounded level of depth; someone can be tired of my responses to the responses to so me someone happening to care about something different than them. It's all equally silly, and if you're convinced that your level of depth is reasonable but the others aren't, I'd highly recommend trying to think about why you're so confident that your opinion is important but ones that come after aren't, because it's very unclear to anyone who doesn't already agree with you, and that's usually a sign that there's no point in saying it at all.


Did you find that some data model patterns were easier to detect for some LLM ? I am curious on how training might have made some agents better at graph navigation for instance?


AJ here, from Airbyte.

Yes, we've definitely found that some API data models are easier for models to navigate than others.

The largest factors of Agent inefficiency we've identified so far are: 1. Many APIs lack robust-enough search, forcing agents to page through hundreds or thousands of paginated responses until they find the record they are looking for (our Context Store addresses this). 2. Many APIs have HUGE response sets. Our MCP helps handle this by letting the agent decide exactly what fields they can return. 3. With our SDK, you can literally build your own MCP on top of any source we support (50+ right now and will grow). This is super powerful, and allows you to build more ergonomic MCP servers and tools - even if the models themselves are not intuitive or easy for the LLM to leverage directly.

Combining all three of these together, we see the vast majority of challenges can be addressed via a strong system prompt for guidance. Fine tuning could get you further but anyway, you'd still want your fine tuned model to build on this same foundation, since the efficiences will transfer across use cases and models.

@ecares - Does this answer your question? What do you think?


Your point about search being a bottleneck is spot on. IMO, search APIs should return guidance to agents to help them winnow down the results faster. For example, if your query returns 1000 results, then it should tell the agent, "too many results, we recommend you filter on column X because of Y to improve your search. Here are the possible values in column X: ..."


There are a lot of APIs like this that I really wish would expose downloading a parquet file instead of trying to implement server-side filtering and reporting query features.


+1

Working with APIs is often frustrating and the worst ones are terribly ineficient and frustrating. Our Agent SDK and Agent Context Store insulates you and your agent from this headache, allowing you to query from those synced datasets directly.

The feedback about wanting to download a parquet file is super interesting...


Glad to hear this resonates with you also. We're aiming to give agents more control over their context, and easier access paths regardless of the source system.


cool, now, when will emacs get a good text editor?


My Emacs came with a good text editor out of the box. If yours doesn't you may have one of those terrible configurations which uses Evil.


It has wayyyyy better nodejs compatibility (day 1 goal)


As far as I know, modern Node compat in Deno is also quite great - I just import packages via 'npm:package' and they work, even install scripts work. Although I remember that in the past Deno's Node compat was worse, yes.


Pretty sure one of the Deno day 1 goals was to correct mistakes made during the early days of Node.js.


Opened it, saw I needed to wrap my routes with api(), closed it - sounds like a solution for a problem PaaS has solved 10 years ago.


Deno is just a marketing company dressed as a software startup


And Rust is the perfect lingua franca to accomplish this.

The demise of both of these trends cannot come soon enough.


And Rust is the perfect lingua franca to accomplish this. The demise of both of these trends cannot come soon enough.


> Deno is written in Rust, which allows them to move faster and more safely. Contributing to and extending Deno is a breeze. You can add Rust crates to the runtime and use them from JS.

Most of Deno's code is actually V8 in C++


Github actually has this feature (only for open source and enterprise IIRC) when there is a SARIF output


SARIF output is on our Roadmap btw!

Github code scanning is not so great from what we've heard so far, but also it's very expensive, you need to be on the Enterprise plan...


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: