undefined

points

[-]

It is a mostly pointless exercise if the goal is trying to contain negative impact of AI agents (e.g. OpenClaw).

It is a very necessary building block for many common features that can be steered in a more deterministic way, e.g. "code interpreter" feature for data analysis or file creation like commonly seen in chat web UIs.

by moezd3 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Believe it or not, once you start working for a regulated industry, it is all you would ever think of. There, people don't care if you are vibing with the latest libraries and harnesses or if it's magic, they care that the entire deployment is in some equivalent of a Faraday cage. Plus, many people just don't appreciate it when their agents go rm -rf / on them.

by iterateoften4 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Yeah, idk I guess it’s interesting if you are an engineer looking for something to do,

But like I see multiple sandbox for agents products a week. Way too saturated of a market

by benswerd4 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I disagree (as a sandboxing company).

With respect to the market, every single sandbox sucks. I'm not gonna shit talk competitors but there is not a good sandboxing platform out there yet — including me — compared to where we'll be in 6 months.

We've heard all the platforms have consistent uptime, feature completeness, networking and debugging issues. And in our own platform we're not 1/10ths of the way through solving the requests we've gotten.

Next generation of Agents needs computers, and those computers are gonna look really different than "sandboxes" do today.

by tcdent4 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I don't think you're wrong, but if you really want to really re-think the approach, building an orchestration layer for Firecracker like every other company in the space is doing is probably not it.