I've got access to their sandbox, don't know if I should've, lol

Huh. The idea is interesting, but I don't understand the decision of keeping it chat-like: it looks like the mix of the worst parts of Google Docs and Slack, I struggle to see how this will help people track decisions.

This can be improved though - I think that simply a separate collaborative doc and a chat linked to that doc would work way better.

Is there an SDK? Can I create the containers programmatically?

Based on comments below the solution is to make the API public and publish the architecture design, along with the binaries.

This way the company can avoid spending too much money on open sourcing the code, and the community can just rewrite the server while keeping the original binaries running.

This is a very myopic and unnecessary cynical sentiment. It's not about you - agents just need to run without your computer being on all the time. Coding is a background task that needs to run unattended now.

This is absolutely not true. I run dozens of Opus agents all day and they need so much constant attention and babysitting (lest everything turn to sh*t) that I would not qualify it anywhere close to “background”. And I’m sure as hell not wrangling these things from my *phone*.

What would it take to remove yourself from the loop so your agents can go parabolic and kick off the singularity?

(Have them cover their own token costs, hehe).

if i didn't have to prompt it to learn from its mistakes and it just "intuitively" knew to do that

I predict that ntsync will eventually evolve into full blown ntoskrnl.ko and there would be virtually no overhead on calling Windows API. You can almost call it a Linux Subsystem for Windows.

It would be fun to call it Windows Subsystem for Linux!

which would be the right use of the term. WSL was originally called LXSS = linux subsystem. As I understand, lawyers stepped in soon after.

They already did the same thing 25 years ago with "Windows Services for UNIX": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Services_for_UNIX

Which is also backwards.

The two terms seem semantically identical (i.e., ambiguous and therefore meaningless) to me.

You wouldn't call a Nintendo emulator "Windows emulator for Nintendo" would you.

Is it just aligning to EB1A standards, or more rigorous and picky process in general?

There are suggestions[0] that the crooks running the country atm are trying to use the EB1 visa quotas for the golden visas instead.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zA3qrg2Kpbo

Missed opportunity for a tongue twister:

Who coded the code Claude Code code?

I've been experimenting with similar concept myself. The linter loop is the only thing that can keep the agent sane in my opinion, and if anyone can generalize bun+tsc loop to other tasks, this would finally be a way to trust LLMs output.

I was annoyed at how Claude Code ignores my CLAUDE.md and skills, so I was looking for ways to expand type checking to them. So I wrote a wrapper on top of claude-agents-sdk that reads my CLAUDE.md and skills, and compiles them into rules - could be linter rules or custom checking scripts. Then it hooks up to all tools and runs the checks. The self improving part comes if some rule doesn't work: I run the tool with the session id in review mode, it proposes the fixes and improves the rule checkers. (not the md files) So it's kinda like vibe coding rules, definitely lowers the bar for me to maintain them. Repo: https://github.com/chebykinn/agent-ruler

You could try wes mckinneys roborev

Hm, speculating a bit, but it feels like NTSYNC is essentially a beginning of NT Subsystem for Linux, or maybe ntoskrnl as a kernel module. Feels like the most clean and fast way to port Windows, since the rest of the interfaces are in the user space in real Windows. Essentially should be almost without overhead: user: [gdi32.dll,user32.dll,kernel32.dll -> ntdll.dll] -> kernel: [ntoskrnl.ko]