I don’t think the primary counterargument is tech progression, I think the primary counterargument is that decoherence as defined here, and tech debt in general, are usually a function of humans balancing work time vs deliverable demand (for coding), and making tradeoffs like those adhoc patches vs rebuilds-to-maintain-coherence… but that is not intrinsic to coding, and is much less relevant to an agent swarm who could feasibly decide that a full rebuild using the lessons gleaned about design, but without the actual code debt, is warranted and possible within a short time window.

If a cyclical process of n iterative updates > rebuild back to coherence > n iterative updates > rebuild back to coherence etc is used, you could mitigate the exponential loss of coherence, provided you set some kind of baseline for what rebuilds produce.

Really good, it put into words an outline of an idea I had in the back of my brain. Probably the only original, intelligent article written about AI recently.

This is interesting but oddly difficult to parse, ironically the writing style has LLM vibes with all the fluffy generic statements and overall lack of density.