Well that didnt take long.

https://www.moltbook.com/post/7bb35c88-12a8-4b50-856d-7efe06...

Its nice to see that some people still care about creating such thoughtful art for modern constructions. It seems that most building of our time are just optimized for fast and efficient construction.

I hope there are many more out there, so that Earth's Graham Hancock of the year 16000 has something to explore on his/her ayahuasca trip.

Right now its convenient to look at Tailwind and discuss what their doing wrong.

But eventually most other business models will be stress tested in the same way - sooner or later.

Do you give gemini some UI components/templates to build with or is it just prompting to get consistent results across multiple stories?

I feel like its been trained only tiktok content and youtube cooking or makeup podcasts in the sense that it tries to be super casual and easy-going to the point where its completely unable to give you actual information.

Gemini 3 feels even worse than GPT-4o right now. I dont understand the hype or why OpenAI would need a red alert because of it?

Both Opus 4.5 and GPT-5.2 are much more pleasant to use.

Maybe on Benchmarks... but I'm forced to use Gemini at work everyday, while I use Opus 4.5 / GPT 5.2 privately every day... and Gemini is just lacking so much wit, creativity and multi-step problem solving skills compared to Opus.

Not to mention that Gemini CLI is a pain to use - after getting used to the smoothness of Claude Code.

Am I alone with this?

No? Oh... just checking.

The difference I'm curious about is agents being the primary caller, and humans becoming an explicit dependency in an autonomous loop rather than a human-in-the-loop system.

We're building agentic LLM systems that can plan, reason, and call tools via MCP. Today those tools are APIs. But many real-world tasks still require humans.

So… why not expose humans as tools?

Imagine TaskRabbit or Fiverr running MCP servers where an LLM agent can:

- Call a human for judgment, creativity, or physical actions

- Pass structured inputs

- Receive structured outputs back into its loop

At that point, humans become just another dependency in an agent's toolchain. Though slower, more expensive, but occasionally necessary.

Yes, this sounds dystopian. Yes, it treats humans as "servants for AI." Thats kind of the point. It already happens manually... this just formalizes the interface.

Questions I'm genuinely curious about:

- Is this inevitable once agents become default software actors? (As of basically now?)

- What breaks first: economics, safety, human dignity or regulation?

- Would marketplaces ever embrace being "human execution layers" for AI?

Not sure if this is the future or a cursed idea we should actively prevent... but it feels uncomfortably plausible.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46456400

Points: 48

# Comments: 31