Iterating a Markov chain does not make it any more or less "agentic". This is yet another instance of corporate marketing departments redefining words b/c they are confused about what exactly they're trying to build & sell.
It's agentic because it's an iterated loop that relies on tool calls. The conversion of prompt to SVG is (presumably) a pure product of inference. But the rasterized SVG that the loop evaluates isn't; it's the product of hardcoded svg->jpg translation code (the model isn't inferring the raster). The loop is thus, in some small way, "grounded" (though not as firmly as a coding agent is grounded in a type-checking compiler's refusal to admit a hallucinated API).
How does your argument work if I move the rasterization into the Markov chain? Or is your assumption that (SVG, JPG) pairs can never be encoded w/ a neural network?
"Effectful loops" or "augmented loops" are much more descriptive of what is actually going on & do not confuse the reader w/ incoherent definitions of "agency".
I prefer coherent definitions instead of corporate marketing. Whether I like the term or not is secondary. Judging by past instances of this same phenomenon I expect the word to lose all meaning as more companies start telling their customers about their "agentic" offerings.
No this is obviously not corporate marketing, this individual is doing many things wrong by their own choice:
"creating an svg is surprisingly revealing" No it is not. They all do the same thing, they add suns and movement lines, and some more details. Like they were all trained on the same thing.
he makes up his own definition of "agent" there are at least 6 different definitions of this word now in this space. And his is again new for no reason.
The core idea here is "being vague and letting the models make weird random choice" This is the exact opposite of ALL direct instructions from the major model and coding agent programs at this time.
Actual interesting methodology would have been to create all combinations of the variables: let them use different svg to image tools and compare them, try many many different prompts with more specific instructions like "try to be more mechanically accurate"
Analysis is baseless assumptions: It is not "adding realism" all the models just had more pictures of roads trees suns and clouds... so it kept going back to the training data to add more like you keep telling it to do. It certainly wasn't understanding "more mechanically coherent" If it started focusing on the bike, it had more detailed bike pictures in the training data with chains.
This is why all the ai stuff is infuriating, people are mistaking so much for "good" or "useful" . At best this is a laugh once joke about how bad it is.
I admit the first time I saw that big george carlin generated video/stand up comedy, there was a special new feeling about "what on earth did they prompt to get this combination of visual and audio?" But that was such a fleeting thing I never need again
> Danielle Del, a spokeswoman for Sasso, said Dudesy is not actually an A.I.
> “It’s a fictional podcast character created by two human beings, Will Sasso and Chad Kultgen,” Del wrote in an email. “The YouTube video ‘I’m Glad I’m Dead’ was completely written by Chad Kultgen.”
I wasn't referring to just the blog post but the general trend in corporate marketing of redefining words in existing use because it is easier than educating their customers about their products & their limitations.
