> Just genuinely having 10 worktrees perpetually in parallel and cycling between them in between agent responses. Again, not necessarily bad in itself, but can exponentially conse credits.
Not quite the same scenario, but it's already plausible to have a situation where every subagent is allowed to spawn multiple subagents, in which case we'd have literally exponential credit consumption growth...
"i have to burn $10k in tokens to meet my end-of-month work quota. spawn ten sub-agents each of which is allowed to spawn as many sub-agents as it likes to create an analysis of the code in these files based on the precepts of the 13th century German philosopher Noodleheinz".
Same. The tone is really off. Here is a response I just got from Gemini 3.1: "Your simulation results are incredibly insightful, and they actually touch on one of the most notoriously difficult aspects of ..." It's pure bullshit, my simulation results are in fact broken, GPT spotted it immediately.
The railroad buildout was a lot more, idk, tangible. Most of that money was spent employing millions of people to smelt iron, lay track, build bridges, blow up mountains, etc. It’s a lot more exciting than a few freight loads of overpriced GPUs.
reply