claude.md predates agents.md.

Yeah but .md predates claude.md. I had agent.md files in my repo before Claude tried to act like it's a special protocol.

The world has moved on.

It can try its own file and fall back to generic like here. What's wrong with that?

Wasting turns? That is silly, use a better harness. Also token usage can mitigated by incremental discovery instead of stuck 5k+ worth of tokens in the AGENT/Claude md file.

Every turn means more tokens in ways that are not obvious to most people and lead to tons of unnecessary cache reads.

No harness can batch your agents.md read with the reads the contents of the file tell it to read.

3 of those are already in there.

I can't imagine that they had managed access to the internet but could not figure out how to contact anyone at the company if they wanted to.

That is apparently the existing academic term. It's got a Wikipedia page. But yes, all buzzwords were invented.

This confirms to me it was indeed originally intended as a buzzword then. :D

Nothing like establishing a new buzzword in a field to get them citations rolling.

New? It stretches back industrially to the WS-* stuff in the early 00s (this is where the term originated), and on the academic side has roots in process calculi from the 90s and session types from the late 00s and early 10s.

If bash placed the current directory in your PATH by default, then yes.

Could file a CVE with Microsoft then, cause thats kinda what cmd.exe is doing:

    > git clone git://evil evil
    > cd evil\
    > git status

The last line would execute git.exe from the cloned repo, wouldn't it?

No, `git` uses the binary in path, to use the repo file it should be `./git.exe`

On Linux.

Look for `NoDefaultCurrentDirectoryInExePath` if you want to learn about Windows.

You're in luck: https://github.com/apple/foundationdb/blob/main/design/corou...

Thanks!

They're referring to Enterprise customers, though should have been clear about it. Enterprise plans on Claude for example no longer include any baseline tokens. It's 100% usage based pricing.

True, but my friends in Enterprise still just purchase Claude Code subs and expense them. They basically get an allowance of $500 or so per month to buy various tools, and of course are banned from Chinese models. (Claude, Codex, Antigravity allowed, basically.)

That's not a very good tldr. The answer claimed in the paper is that the combination of the two is better than either alone.

And that's the real tl;dr. Hybrids win whenever anyone actually checks. To really be scientific we still have to check, but.. why wouldn't they? Probabilistic AI brings intuition/learning but can't plan/search. Classical brings planning and search, but has no intuition or learning.

That's a very generous interpretation.

Fortunately the economics of infinitely copyable software aren't going anywhere. If there is actually a sizable market, it can be served with relatively little cost, compared to hand-producing physical goods. I am not fully convinced there will be such a market, though.