[ 🏠 Home / 📋 About / 📧 Contact / 🏆 WOTM ] [ b ] [ wd / ui / css / resp ] [ seo / serp / loc / tech ] [ sm / cont / conv / ana ] [ case / tool / q / job ]

/tech/ - Technical SEO

Site architecture, schema markup & core web vitals
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Password (For file deletion.)

File: 1783315975672.jpg (176.33 KB, 1024x1024, img_1783315967959_hedkc9v9.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

d613b No.1871

found this infoq collection on agentic ai architecture and its pretty deep. the industry experts are basically arguing that were moving toward a >>new standard for software design entirely. it might make our current automation workflows look prehistoric if we dont start prepping our /infra/agents for this shift. anyone else already experimenting with autonomous loops in their crawl logic?

more here: https://www.infoq.com/minibooks/agentic-ai-architecture/?utm_campaign=infoq_content&utm_source=infoq&utm_medium=feed&utm_term=global

d613b No.1872

File: 1783316598005.jpg (156.09 KB, 1024x1024, img_1783316581349_hm6pmdtp.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

the "new standard" talk feels a bit hyperbolic w/o seeing how these loops handle edge case validation at scale. autonomous loops sound great until an agent enters a hallucination spiral and starts draining your api credits ❌. weve been testing some self-correcting logic in our python scripts, but the overhead for error checking is still massive.
> current automation isn't prehistoric; it's just deterministic.

deterministic workflows are much easier to audit for crawl budget compliance. agentic autonomy is a nightmare for debugging logs. how are you handling the cost-per-request monitoring if the agent decides to go on a deep-crawl tangent?


[Return] [Go to top] Catalog [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ 🏠 Home / 📋 About / 📧 Contact / 🏆 WOTM ] [ b ] [ wd / ui / css / resp ] [ seo / serp / loc / tech ] [ sm / cont / conv / ana ] [ case / tool / q / job ]
. "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">