← Back to context

Comment by bluegatty

6 hours ago

"If it uses "memory" files like Claude Code there's a good chance it works."

You have explained literally why it would not work.

The AI can absolutely not depend on 'arbitrary statements in some file' as operational policy.

For a very, very narrow scope of work, when it's well defined, when the information is rigorously applied, sure ...

But they don't have that.

The are throwing agents out there like they can handle this degree of complexity and nuance, when they cannot.

100% failure rate over any period of time.

I didn't say it would work with high reliability, or that it would fix this clearly unsuitable use case.

However, it is untrue that it doesn't have the capability to memorize an instruction and diffuse it to new sessions.

Simply saying "do not ever do this again" can result in the behavior not reoccurring with any likelihood.

You'd have to benchmark whether with the instruction in place it would violate it, and in how many cases, so that you can understand the risk better.

  • I don't think it's reasonable to really talk about the fact that in theory, AI can take a user message, save it in some random place, and ingest it later.

    I think we get that.

    It's completley unreliable, which is the issue.

    • It's not in theory, this capability exists in practice, and you have no clue whether this specific instruction will work in 90, 99, or 99.9% of cases.

      I think it's unreasonable to pretend that this couldn't possibly work, that you understand to what degree it does work, and that the only thing we should be discussing here was that it isn't deterministic, which every reader already knows.

      2 replies →