47 comments

[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 72.0 ms ] thread
[flagged]
> A lot of developers either don’t use coding agents to their full potential

Define "full potential".

Sounds like you are just making things up to sell your product.

>"Amplifier is a complete development environment that takes AI coding assistants and supercharges them with discovered patterns, specialized expertise, and powerful automation — turning a helpful assistant into a force multiplier that can deliver complex solutions with minimal hand-holding."

Again this "supercharging" nonsense? Maybe in Satiyas confabulated AI-powered universe, but not in the real world I am afraid...

README files in the "ai_context" directory provide the ultimate AI Slop reading experience..
[flagged]
That's essentially what a CI environment does. "Multiple tabs" and "swarms". This part should feel familiar to any developer. Having multiple things running in the background to help you is not a new concept and we've been doing it for decades.

Whether these new helpers that explore ideas on their own are helpful or not, and for which cases, is another discussion.

Sounds like a research project, they're sharing it out to get some feedback and get a discussion going.

How is this different than Google's Jules thing? Both sort of experimental exploratory things.

Sorry, is this Hacker News? This kind of project is exactly what I'd expect hackers to create. Not using AI in boring limited practical ways where it's known to somehow work, but supercharging AI with AI with AI... etc, and seeing what happens!
[flagged]
I see you're being down voted, Reddit style. But you're on the mark about the hate tone of comments. If you don't like Amplifier, don't use it. No need to spew hate.
Contributors

claude Claude

Interesting given Microsoft’s history with OpenAI

more than history -- early, massive investment in OpenAI by Microsoft and formerly their exclusive compute provider.

This stood out to me too, seems like a months-long project with heavy use of Claude

Can we get Windows 7 back instead? Nadella rode the cloud wave in an easy upmarket, his "AI" obsession will fail. No one wants this.

The Austrian army already switched to LibreOffice for security reasons, we don't need another spyware and code stealing tool.

I'll always be skeptical about using AI to amplify AI. I think humans are needed to amplify AI since humans are so far documented to be significantly more creative and proactive in pushing the frontier than AI. I know, it's maybe a radical concept to digest.
> Never lose context again. Amplifier automatically exports your entire conversation before compaction, preserving all the details that would otherwise be lost. When Claude Code compacts your conversation to stay within token limits, you can instantly restore the full history.

If this is restoring the entire context (and looking at the source code, it seems like it is just reloading the entire context) how does this not result in an infinite compaction loop?

Billions in investment into OpenAI and this is a wrapper for Claude API usage. This is very much a microsoft product.
A lot of snark in these comments. Has anyone actually tried it yet?
Claude Code is great, this is just a set of tweaks, not really "research". For anyone into vibe coding, there are dozens of interesting video tutorials on customizing Claude Code and running practical jobs, not limited to coding.
[flagged]
> "I have more ideas than time to try them out" — The problem we're solving

I see a possible paradox here.

For exploration, my goal is _to learn_. Trying out multiple things is not wasting time, it's an intensive learning experience. It's not about finding what works fast, but understanding why the thing that works best works best. I want to go through it. Maybe that's just me though, and most people just want to get it done quickly.

Starting in Claude bypass mode does not give me confidence:

WARNING: Claude Code running in Bypass Permissions mode │ │ │ │ In Bypass Permissions mode, Claude Code will not ask for your approval before running potentially dangerous commands. │ │ This mode should only be used in a sandboxed container/VM that has restricted internet access and can easily be restored if damaged.

Is this going to be another HN dropbox moment?
I do a lot of work with claude code and codex cli but frankly as soon as I see all the LLM-tells in the readme, and then all the commit messages written by claude, I immediately don't want to read the readme or try the project until someone else recommends it to me.

This is gaining stars and forks but I don't know if that's just because it's under the github.com/microsoft, and I don't really know how much that means.

I think that letting an LLM run unsupervised on a task is a good way to waste time and tokens. You need to catch them before they stray too far off-path. I stopped using subagents in Claude because I wasn't able to see what they were doing and intervene. Indirectly asking an LLM to prompt another LLM to work on a long, multi-step task doesn't seem like a good idea to me. I think community efforts should go toward making LLMs more deterministic with the help of good old-fashioned software tooling instead of role-playing and writing prayers to the LLM god.
There are two opposite ways to do this.

Codex is like an external consultant. You give it specs and it quietly putters away and only stops when the feature is done.

Claude is built more like a pair programmer, it displays changes live, "talks" about what it's doing and what's working et.

It's really, REALLY hard to abort codex mid-run to correct it. With Claude it's a lot easier when you see it doing something stupid or getting of the rails. Just hit ESC and tell it where it went wrong (like use task build, don't build it manually or use markdownlint, don't spend 5 minutes editing the markdown line by line).

The very first line in the readme is a quote, attributed to "the problem we're solving".

That's cute