One benefit is that they're easy to use remotely over SSH or in a VM, but I agree that a local, native GUI is generally better than a TUI.

▲

fauigerzigerk a day ago | parent | next [-]

You can use VSCode over SSH as well.

▲

dns_snek a day ago | parent [-]

You can but with agents you might want a security boundary/faux-airgap between the agent and your machine. I don't think you should trust X11/Wayland forwarding to maintain strong isolation against a malicious server in that scenario.

TUIs are superior in that case because they cuts the attack surface down to a regular SSH session.

▲

smashed a day ago | parent [-]

Agreed. I sandbox agents using containers which also allows me to inject credentials and all sorts of things.

I think there's 2 clear layers in these coding tools: the runtime engine that lives ON the system, can execute commands, read/write files, make network calls and the UI, which can be a local (TUI) or remote.

A remote UI allows you to manage multiple remote runtimes concurrently and can even be on your phone.

Anyone preferring Desktop vs TUI is not managing multiple systems I would guess.

	▲	miki123211 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It should be three (four) layers, and that seems to be the emerging architecture for agents. Layer 1 is the frontend (TUI, GUI, phone app). Layer 2 is the brain / harness (the thing that stores sessions, connects to MCP servers and decides what to do next given the latest model answer). This part would ideally run in the cloud, and be independent of the particular ephemeral sandbox you run your commands in, or the particular phone you view the transcript on. Layer three is the hands (the thing that actually executes tool calls on a machine), this should be a small utility that the brain connects to over ssh, or a local Unix socket if colocated.

▲

whoanoway a day ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]