this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2026
16 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

43748 readers
159 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
top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

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 coherence etc is used, you could mitigate the exponential loss of coherence, provided you set some kind of baseline for what rebuilds produce.

[–] Blisterexe@lemmy.zip 4 points 4 days ago

Really good, it put into words an outline of an idea I had in the back of my brain. Probably the only original, intelligent article written about AI recently.

[–] Kirk@startrek.website 0 points 5 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

This is interesting but oddly difficult to parse, ironically the writing style has LLM vibes with all the fluffy generic statements and overall lack of density.

[–] Gaywallet@beehaw.org 4 points 3 days ago

it's a really dense subject, it's okay to just admit it's difficult to read, you don't have to accuse it of LLM usage lol

[–] Kache@lemmy.zip 4 points 5 days ago

Didn't seem all that AI sloppy to me