I think this is probably a good way to think about it. Breadth is going to be important if you want to reasonably navigate the new world. In an emergency even if you are using an agent you will be much quicker if you know what questions to ask the agent and how to guide it.

▲

adrq 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

yes exactly, in most cases you will have an agent you can use to help you solve the problem anyway, but you need to know what to ask it to do

▲

apples_oranges 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Guiding works as long as the agent is neutral or on your side but if it’s secretly an adversary ..

	▲	zaphar 9 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I would argue that recognizing if the agent is an adversary also requires breadth and a willingness to dive deep when you need to. Both things that the article highlights. Before agents that is what every high performing person I've ever worked with was like. It was the kind of person I wanted to hire when I was in charge of that sort of thing. Enough breadth to know where to dive deep and enough willingness and curiosity to dive deep.
	▲	MrDarcy 9 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		We’ve been trusting (or distrusting) our agents for all of recorded history. The choice between Claude or Codex matters. Trust matters.
	▲	adrq 9 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		this is true for humans too