[–] armchairhacker 7 hours ago
[–] bee_rider 2 hours ago
Memories are lossy things that live in our brains, I’d expect they to be stored in some native LLM encoded representation (which would make the lack of standardization understandable).
This probably seems like a dumb distinction, but I think some of the problems in the article come from calling these things memories. Like, the prompt injection/provenience issue. The model has received some notes from someone about a topic, if it they were treated as “notes from <whoever sent them> about <topic>” instead of “my memories about <topic>” that should put things on the right footing to start at least, right?
[–] reactordev 6 hours ago
[–] soraminazuki 5 hours ago
[–] yladiz 4 hours ago
[–] soraminazuki 3 hours ago
It's even worse when applied to LLMs, which are more unpredictable.
[–] ares623 1 hour ago
[–] reactordev 9 minutes ago
[–] alberto467 1 hour ago
In reality many of them have not needed to look at a data structure or do any real computer science for years. They were just attending bullshit meetings and approving some pr with some basic sql query or some new react code.
Common people knew very little about computers and so they thought they were running on magic and that the software engineers were the magicians.
[–] soraminazuki 46 minutes ago
[–] esafak 1 hour ago
[–] Tejush 2 hours ago
[–] speedping 8 hours ago
[–] jaynate 8 hours ago
[–] grey-area 7 hours ago
I usually read the comments before deciding if the article is worth my time.
[–] bee_rider 2 hours ago
[–] twoodfin 2 hours ago
It’s a bad thing if you valued the thoughtful, insightful, well-structured technical writing that used to be behind many highly-upvoted hn links.
[–] twoodfin 2 hours ago
[–] jsdalton 2 hours ago
People here give AI detection a lot of flack because it’s problematic if your’re using it, for example, to evaluate student essays and make accusations of AI plagiarism.
But if you just need an occasional sanity check while browsing the web? I highly recommend.
[–] cevn 1 hour ago
[–] ulrikrasmussen 7 hours ago
This has no value because noone can separate what was designed by a human from design details that the LLM made up on the spot. That's fine for one-off generated stuff like web pages, but as a proposed standard for everyone to build on? No.
[–] Muromec 7 hours ago
[–] stein1946 7 hours ago
Yes it is and it's not a technical one: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/eu-icons-l...
[–] nicce 7 hours ago
[–] Muromec 7 hours ago
[–] verdverm 4 hours ago
[–] hbcdbff 7 hours ago
Given that the author could already have just inserted the text “hey I generated this via AI”, I see absolutely no reason why they’d go to the effort of adding an “AI label”.
[–] Squarex 6 hours ago
[–] Caracas288 7 hours ago
[–] aacid 7 hours ago
Honestly I do not care if article was written letter by letter by human or written by agent steered by human.
I care about knowledge and quality, it it is there then it doesn't matter how was it written. I too hate LLM slop but I understand that not everything done by LLM have to be slop.
[–] grey-area 7 hours ago
Yes the style is annoying and bombastic, but the objection goes deeper than that; it's annoying to have someone generate text with an LLM from a small outline or prompt, not even edit it for sense, and dump it on readers.
[–] jaapz 7 hours ago
[–] Muromec 7 hours ago
At the point where you read enough LLM written text with zero substance narrating wikipedia article or heard that voice on youtube restating the same thesis over and over for 15 minutes.
The rule of thumb: if I can detect it's an LLM without trying to detects it's an LLM and the feeling doesn't go away, it's a slop.
[–] mthines 7 hours ago
The sections, points, ideas are by me :)
[–] 1123581321 6 hours ago
[–] Kwpolska 6 hours ago
[–] grey-area 7 hours ago
[–] heikkilevanto 6 hours ago
[–] SuperV1234 7 hours ago
[–] zaphirplane 7 hours ago
[–] acron0 7 hours ago
[–] holoduke 7 hours ago
[–] brink 3 hours ago
[–] Fordec 9 hours ago
[–] andai 8 hours ago
[–] moron4hire 5 hours ago
[–] andai 3 hours ago
[–] dizhn 8 hours ago
[–] baalimago 7 hours ago
Besides, do we really want memory of user A's agents to co-exist with memory of user B? Not really. So the argument for collaboration and sharing is quite slim, at least for coding agents. The repository specific context can be encoded into a docs/ or architecture/ directory, just like it's been done pre-agent times as well.
For monitoring deployed agents: maybe. For this I built (yet another) memory management tool slivingdoc.dev, with this it's possible to pull down the durable context of all agents. But here the problem is a distributed system one, not format of the memories.
[–] verdverm 4 hours ago
[–] imgyuri 9 hours ago
[–] jstanley 9 hours ago
It would be like trying to accomplish something as a human but all your reference material is always in a different format, it would be maddening.
[–] troupo 8 hours ago
Only it's not read by agents, and largely ignored.
From Anthropic's recent self-congratulatory article:
---start quote ---
Injected memories use up valuable tokens, and an incorrect note can be carried into every session. Loading a note also doesn’t guarantee that Claude acts on it: our documentation on Claude Code warns that longer instruction files reduce adherence
...
It loads only the first 200 lines or 25 KB of MEMORY.md
https://www.anthropic.com/research/components-of-agent-memor...
--- end quote ---
[–] anuptalwalkar 2 hours ago
Nobody is building agents for memory, but they are building on top of it. you make solutions simplify themselves so that users can focus on actual business problems, nothing more.
Small plug- I have been running https://github.com/Polign/recall in a few production workflows, and most I hear about is, that it just works.
[–] mmasu 7 hours ago
[–] everforward 7 hours ago
The agent actually did pretty well managing and searching it with grep.
A lot of these memory systems are reaching for the stars and I sort of suspect we’re way past the Pareto point for coding there.
[–] Muromec 6 hours ago
Like what are you store there that text files aren't enough.
[–] skeptic_ai 7 hours ago
[–] everforward 5 hours ago
The notes for v1 probably don’t apply to v2.
Maybe different if you’re doing a global memory instead of a per-project memory.
[–] totetsu 8 hours ago
but is were going to make the memorys portable.. we need to make the things they are pointing to portable also..
[–] locallylinear 6 hours ago
I don’t think “oh it’s lines 10-50 in file A that has this code I’m looking for”. It’s much looser, something like:
- maybe I can’t fully remember file A’s name but I can fuzzy search for it based on what I do remember
- I search for a function or variable name that I remember, again kind of fuzzy searching. Or if I can’t find it,
- I start quickly scanning the whole file for relevant variable/function names
Obviously storing exact references will be more efficient at lookup time but to your great point, the environment is changing too much, especially now. Having just a) a starting point on where and what to search and b) an understanding the code base will and should change , feel like some of the principles a memory system should assume. Not that it’s mutually exclusive with what you said - just not sure the juice is worth the squeeze to make the thing memory is pointing to portable.
[–] totetsu 5 hours ago
[–] htsh 7 hours ago
The bytedance team makes it. I often wonder if it does not get attention here in America b/c it is Chinese?
[–] grey-area 7 hours ago
Imagine how humans would function if we carried our memories around in overflowing notepads and had to consult them every time we wanted to know a fact or remember a person we had met, it would be exhausting and inefficient.
[–] Muromec 6 hours ago
[–] hagen8 9 hours ago
[–] eladlev 7 hours ago
[–] Muromec 6 hours ago
[–] hemkeshr 8 hours ago
[–] totetsu 8 hours ago
[–] rickdg 7 hours ago
What are some real issues now? Auth? You want to retroactively implement boundaries? Is version control the problem?
[–] mohsen1 5 hours ago
While there have been many attempts to structure how agents operate, a recent Anthropic article showed that when they didn't tell Claude how to use memory, it actually used its memory better. Ultimately, we have to come to terms with how little is required from us when LLMs are this intelligent. often doing things better in ways that we sometimes cannot comprehend.
[–] mceachen 3 hours ago
[–] jaynate 7 hours ago
[–] kohlerm 7 hours ago
[–] slopinthebag 9 hours ago
[–] SwellJoe 9 hours ago
This has the benefit of being something you can easily read over every now and then to make sure the model hasn't baked in some random comment you made about a specific circumstance a month ago and made a weird religion out of it.
[–] nonethewiser 8 hours ago
“Oh damn look its recommending something that looks like hexagonal architecture. I guess hexagonal is a really good - hey wait a second …”
[–] Kwpolska 6 hours ago
[–] nonethewiser 8 hours ago
Memory just ensures there is a fairly high level of drift and inaccuracy in your context. Unless YOU are manually curating it.
Its similar to wiki systems where your agent produces tons of documentation and decision records, etc. Its a bunch of assertions about your codebase that you aren’t vetting and which is at most 90% correct. Thats good enough for a feature or bug fix that you can validate with tests but for the love of god throw the details away. You don’t want to codify that. It’s polluting the context and gimping the model.
[–] vcryan 2 hours ago
If there is something an agent needs to know across sessions shouldn't the operator also know and include that information intentionally?
I often catch Claude (and wardon) noting information that is only pertinent to a single season as if it were a forever rule and then I need to tell it to forget.
Maybe the moment we need is to remove this capability?
[–] ftchd 2 hours ago
Surely the random seed of my agent session will spit out the right one.
[–] cryptoboy2283 7 hours ago
[–] te_chris 9 hours ago
[–] jarym 5 hours ago
We only have OpenTelemetry because of years of people working out what metrics and logging look like.
It’s too early in my opinion to standardise agent memory.
[–] mfkhalil 8 hours ago
The best version of memory I've experienced is when I give my agent a memory directory and just let it do what it wants in there, with minimal rules on my end.
[–] alfiedotwtf 8 hours ago
[–] dizhn 8 hours ago
[–] j45 4 hours ago
This looked interesting, unfortunately it feels far too long for humans to spend time reading.
People might really be starting to write like LLMs, it’s why reading books is the single biggest anti-slopping protection for the human brain.
The “shape” of the article was a word generator performatively generating larger words where simpler ones would do. “That holds”
[–] monster_truck 9 hours ago
[–] hbcdbff 7 hours ago
[–] jonstewart 2 hours ago
[–] Implicated 9 hours ago
Index it all. Embed it all. Give your agents the ability to query it all. Eval different configurations to figure out what works best for you.
AI does benefit from learning to use skills, and being instructed with good structures (like “save [specific important kind of detail] in memories” and “plan before implementing anything”). But none of these memory solutions seem better than any other, they’re basically just different folders. Your CLAUDE.md can say “see AGENTS.md” and AGENTS.md can say “write memories to .agent/memories/“, and I’d be interested in a measurement, but I assume it performs almost the exact same as native CLAUDE.md and .claude/memories.
One thing I’ve noticed AI does much better than me, is not have OCD over the “perfect” solution.