this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2026
16 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
43748 readers
231 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't think the primary counterargument is tech progression, I think the primary counterargument is that decoherence as defined here, and tech debt in general, are usually a function of humans balancing work time vs deliverable demand (for coding), and making tradeoffs like those adhoc patches vs rebuilds-to-maintain-coherence... but that is not intrinsic to coding, and is much less relevant to an agent swarm who could feasibly decide that a full rebuild using the lessons gleaned about design, but without the actual code debt, is warranted and possible within a short time window.
If a cyclical process of
n iterative updates > rebuild back to coherence > n iterative updates > rebuild back to coherenceetc is used, you could mitigate the exponential loss of coherence, provided you set some kind of baseline for what rebuilds produce.