[tkiolp4]

I think in the future (in 10 years?) we are going to see a lot of disposable/throwaway software. I don’t know, imagine this: I need to buy tickets for a concert. I ask my AI agent that I want tickets. The agent creates code on the fly and uses it to purchase my tickets. The code could be simple curl command, or a full app with nice ui/ux. As a user I don’t need to see the code.

If I want to buy more tickets the same day, the ai agent will likely reuse the same code. But if i buy tickets again in one year, the agent will likely rebuild the code to adjust to the new API version the ticket company now offers. Seems wasteful but it’s more dynamic. Vendors only need to provide raw APIs and your agent can create the ui experience you want. In that regard nobody but the company that owns your agent can inject malware into the software you use. Some software will last more than others (e.g., the music player your agent provided won’t probably be rebuilt unless you want a new look and feel or extra functionality). I think we’ll adopt the “cattle, not pets” approach to software too.

[slopinthebag]

Or, and hear me out here, you go to the existing site or app which sells concert tickets, press the purchase button, and then you have your tickets.

Like what are we even doing here...

[mixdup]

I know people have done truly amazing things with AI lately, but I feel this in my bones. Almost every demo I see is like, uh, I don't need these extremely simple things in my life automated. I can just go to Delta and buy a plane ticket. I actually want to write my own email to my mom or wife. Of course a demo is just a demo, but also come on

[kami23]

Why would I do that if the gateway to the internet becomes these LLM interfaces? How is it not easier to ask or type 'buy me tickets for Les Mis'? In the ideal world it will just figure it out, or I frustratingly have to interact with a slightly different website to purchase tickets for each separate event I want to see.

One of the benefits that I see is as much as I love tech and writing software, I really really do not want to interface with a vast majority of the internet that has been designed to show the maximum amount of ads in the given ad space.

The internet sucks now, anything that gets me away from having ads shoved in my face constantly and surrounded by uncertainty that you could always be talking to a bot.

[alwillis]

It's more like:

- You have to work; you can't stay online all day waiting for the tickets to go on sale

- You have your agent watch for when the tickets go on sale

- Because the agent has its own wallet, it spends the 6 hours waiting for the tickets to go on sale and buys them for you

- Your agent informs you via SMS, iMessage, email, Telegram or whatever messaging platform of your choice

Yes agentic wallets are a thing now [1].

[1]: https://x.com/CoinbaseDev/status/2023893470725947769?s=20

[somehowadev]

Personally the experience getting tickets at the moment is horrible.

Endless queues, scalpers grabbing tickets within a second. Having to wait days/weeks periodically checking to see if a ticket is available.

The only platform I’m aware of that does guarantee a ticket can be purchased if available is Dice once you join a wait list. You get given a reasonable time to purchase it in too.

So I can see why people would prefer to defer this to an agent and not care about the implementation, I personally would. In the past I’ve been able to script notifications for it for myself and can see more people benefiting from it.

[diabllicseagull]

seriously. I don't even wanna compile code when binaries are available in a repository. the thought of everybody preferring vibe-coding something on their own over using something that's battle-tested and available to the collective is just crazy to me.

[tkiolp4]

My point is: such apps wouldn’t need to exist if agents can provide in the future the same functionality for a fraction of the cost. Sure if ticketmaster is here to stay forever and keep their app up to date, we can keep using it. But what about new products? Would companies decide to build a single fixed app that all the users have to use, instead of, well, not building it? Sure the functionality would still need to be provided by the company (e.g., like offered in the form of an api), so they keep getting profit.

It’s like we usually say: companies should focus on their core value. And typically the ui/ux is not the core value of companies.

[majorchord]

You can already instruct AI to navigate the existing website for you and buy the tickets... OpenClaw is one such recent tool.

[whackernews]

Aren’t we kinda realising that disposable/throwaway stuff is, like, bad? Why do we have to go down this wasteful and hyper-consumptive route AGAIN. Can we try and see the patterns here and move forwards?

[tkiolp4]

Agree in general. I don’t see how making an agent create software is more wasteful than making dozens of engineers create the same thing. The latter seems more wasteful.

We have compilers creating binaries every single day. We don’t say thats wasteful.

[falkensmaize]

I don't know if this is the future or not, but it seems to serve no real purpose other than to enrich LLM company profits. There is real value in well designed code that has been battle tested and hardened over years of bugfixes and iteration. It's reliable, it's reusable, it's efficient and it's secure. The opposite of hastily written and poorly understood vibe code that may or may not even do what you want it to do, even while you think it's doing what you want it to do.

[democracy]

there is software and software. lots of enterprise software gets re-written every 2-5 years, some projects are in rubbish bin as soon as finished (if finished)

[SOLAR_FIELDS]

This is also where I think we end up. If the behavior of the system is specified well enough, then the code itself is cheap and throwaway. Why have a static system that is brittle to external changes when you can just reconstruct the system on the fly?

Might be quite awhile before you can do this with large systems but we already see this on smaller contextual scales such as Claude Code itself

[candiddevmike]

The specification for most systems _is the code_. English cannot describe business rules as succinctly as code, and most business rules end up being implied from a spec rather than directly specified, at least in my experience.

The thought of converting an app back into a spec document or list of feature requests seems crazy to me.

[kamaal]

>>If the behavior of the system is specified well enough, then the code itself is cheap and throwaway. Why have a static system that is brittle to external changes when you can just reconstruct the system on the fly?

You mean to say if the unit and functional tests cases are given the system must generate code for you? You might want to look at Prolog in that case.

>>Might be quite awhile before you can do this with large systems but we already see this on smaller contextual scales such as Claude Code itself

We have been able to do something like this reliably for like 50 years now.

[Vegenoid]

> If the behavior of the system is specified well enough

Then it becomes code: a precise symbolic representation of a process that can be unambiguously interpreted by a computer. If there is ambiguity, then that will be unsuitable for many systems.