Jack Dorsey launches Buzz to combine team chat, AI agents and Git hosting

https://runtimewire.com/article/jack-dorsey-block-buzz-team-chat-ai-agents-git

by ryanmerket • 1 day ago

367 325 1 day ago

runtimewire.com

https://x.com/jack/status/2079605800998146171, https://xcancel.com/jack/status/2079605800998146171

https://buzz.xyz/

rvz• 1 day ago

This is the correct link to the announcement from jack: https://x.com/jack/status/2079605800998146171

Website link is here: https://buzz.xyz

The buzz project itself is also open source: https://github.com/block/buzz

giancarlostoro• 1 day ago

I always chuckle when someone makes a GitHub alternative, and the code is hosted on GitHub. Kind of shows that replacing GitHub isn't just about replacing the code.

Gecko4072• 1 day ago

Now when I see new software projects I just think of how much of them are made with agents and the unreliability/easy abandonment that comes with it. Ten years ago this product would have been of a known quality. Not saying anything about buzz specifically.

EagleEdge• 1 day ago

I think it depends on the team behind it, the models being used for the building, testing and verification.

mplewis2• 1 day ago

oh, you absolutely know this one is going to be a slopfest. Buzz is going to make GitHub look like a paragon of nines.

butlike• 1 day ago

It's probably just Dorsey's vibe-coded side project. The scope isn't too big and it's rather unimpressive

cyanydeez• 1 day ago

when I see new projects I think: Is it useful?

IF yes, I clone it and point my LLM at it to do whatever I need it to do.

You're think with your cloud-LLM brain; maybe buy a good GPU and download a local model and you too can-do attitude!

AlienRobot• 1 day ago

The ease of abandonment is real.

1. Generate function with AI.

2. Generate tests with AI.

3. Modify function with AI.

4. Tests no longer pass.

5. Delete all tests.

6. Generate tests with AI.

horsawlarway2• 1 day ago

I find this thought process somewhat faulty given that the vast majority of software ends up in that spot regardless.

Hard to take this as that big a deal when Google literally launched a product along similar social themes named "Google Buzz" which lasted all of like 16 months in 2010, well before agents and llms.

Either the project will find a fit, or it won't - and code quality doesn't have all that much to do with it existing in 2 years (some - but not as much as engineers want to believe).

witx• 24 hours ago

Argument similar to: people still get hurt riding a skate without a helmet, why do I need it anyway?

Brian_K_White3• 21 hours ago

And I find this thought process somewhat faulty.

_pdp_5• 1 day ago

It is safe bet to assume that all of them are generated with LLMs.

overgard• 1 day ago

Yeah, it used to be the friction of making something was at least a partial sign that it had been thought out to some degree. Now it's just "lets lob it on users and make them figure out if this is worth a damn". I feel like with a lot of this stuff, there isn't much value to being an early adopter and there's a lot of risk. Better just to wait a couple months to see how things shake out. If it has staying power it really won't matter if you're behind by like a few months.

kccqzy2• 1 day ago

Nah. I made plenty of software and then abandoned them because I lost interest in them. My GitHub is already a fairly large collection of my own abandoned software, and there are 10x more on my PC that I never bothered to upload to GitHub.

Easy abandonment is always there.

Brian_K_White3• 21 hours ago

Not at all the same thing. Your half-baked works can't appear to be anything else than what they actually are. You are in no danger of wasting anyone's time.

For one thing, you probably never tried to mislead anyone. Did you put 8 minutes of effort into something and then come here and try to say "Hey world, here is a thing you should all care about and invest in. I mean, I didn't, but you should."?

But even if you did try, you physically cannot (5 years ago) generate the equivalent of 10 years of work by a 10 person team complete with docs and tests that all looks plausible and maybe even runs.

CivBase• 21 hours ago

I'm left wondering why I should bother adopting - much less paying for - these kinds of projects. If it's that trivial to throw together, what value are you even delivering for me? Why wouldn't I just use the same tricks to spin my own solution that does exactly what I need and not whatever you think I might need?

fantasizr• 8 hours ago

i really never want to be an early adopter anymore. I need 6 months of vetting to determine if it's the flavor of the week (or flavor of the DAY)

muglug2• 1 day ago

[I work for Slack, opinions very much my own]

Having agents see everything you and your colleagues see is cool.

The challenge comes when you want to make certain things private to certain people. In that world you don’t want multiplayer agents leaking data, so you end up having to write and maintain complex rulesets about what specific resources agents have access to.

Single-player agents, on the other hand, are much more straightforward — they act on a single user’s behalf, and then the challenge is ensuring the single-player agent cannot exfiltrate private data into a shared space unless the user specifically permits it.

GodelNumbering• 1 day ago

so you end up having to write and maintain complex rulesets about what specific resources agents have access to.

Why wouldn't you simply use the group chat ID (+more) to key the conversations on?

paxys2• 1 day ago

Because there’s an unlimited number of groups with different combinations of memberships. If I am in group A but not group B and an agent is in both, what is it allowed to share with me?

mrcwinn• 1 day ago

Seems easy for Buzz to solve. I’m just happy to have an alternative to Slack.

TZubiri• 1 day ago

The product seems to use the same 'scoping' mechanism that humans would use, so you can give agents access to whatever 'channels' you want.

The issue seems to be that they 'invented' an auth and permission protocol instead of delegating to something existing, it would be as if they thought their idea of permissions were novel.

_pdp_5• 1 day ago

I agree with what you are saying but this is not how we solved the issue with who can access what.

In our cloud harness we have the notion of shared and private secrets. When something is authenticated with a shared secret it is basically something that can be used in a public setting. If something is private then it can be only accessed via trusted channel. It works for slack, telegram, etc.

In fact, our slack agents are very strong this department and it is guaranteed there is zero leak of private information.

datadrivenangel4• 1 day ago

And if someone gets access to a channel that they shouldn't?

The best norms around slack channels is to have most channels be public, but have norms where not everyone is in every channel.

zackham• 1 day ago

all ingested data and all derivations of that data can link to source channel and associated ACL that syncs with the source. then search/reads/etc just join on and respect the ACL. not that complicated to manage for things like slack, meetings, etc.

swader9995• 1 day ago

Private groups are the worst thing in a truly collaborative environment. Would be nice in Slack to have a Publish this whole freaking thread to a public channel button.

tomaskafka• 1 day ago

But who is allowed to press it? If anyone, then anyone can expose career ruining messages from someone else, even inadvertently.

aftergibson• 24 hours ago

I'm confused are against the idea of private groups at all or just that you can't change the visibility settings later on?

Sleaker2• 23 hours ago

Pretty sure slack enterprise has this feature for turning private chats into public channels.

Edit: verified. You can do this but takes an extra step of converting to private channel first then swapping the channel mode.

Sleaker2• 23 hours ago

Pretty sure slack enterprise has this feature for turning private chats into public channels.

Checked docks. You can convert any private chat into a private channel. Then swap the channel from private to public.

claw-el• 7 hours ago

Having every inconsequential discussion on public channels is what really lower the signal to noise ratio of messages on Slack nowadays. I am starting to revert back to email now because at least the signal to noise ratio there is much higher.

dgunay• 1 day ago

Maybe this is naive or startup-brained of me: I understand not wanting HR-related things to be potentially exposed by a misaligned agent, but when it comes purely to the building of software I personally do not care at all who can read the code/discussions & engage with the process.

muglug2• 1 day ago

Totally get that for code! But there are orgs where non-code things are compartmentalised — maybe for leak reasons — that still want to employees to make use of agents.

s_trumpet• 18 hours ago

For code, often contractors and partners are only given scoped access to relevant projects.

another-dave2• 1 day ago

My understanding of what they were saying Buzz is is that agents are "1st class" users in their own right, rather than being an app integration.

If you have a user called Claude, then you just apply ACL as normal & you don't care if they're human or bot, right?

jaggederest2• 1 day ago

The issue is when users interact with claude, what can they see? If the AI can see super-secret-payroll-details.md - is it allowed to discuss that with any user? is there some sort of internal ACL within claude that asks pretty please don't tell everyone they're underpaid?

That's why multiuser agents can be an issue.

The other way to do this, is to have claude installed for everyone, and any user's chat with claude uses their personal permissions via something like oauth delegation or AWS IAM role kinda things. But that, again, is complicated ACL logic living through the delegation of roles and access

daniel_iversen• 19 hours ago

I'm from Asana so I'm probably biased too :) and I agree single-player agents are easier, but multi-player agents that understand end to end workflows etc. are very powerful. That's what we've built and yes it took a lot of thought and time to built it in a way that it would be privacy conscious and not leak the wrong thing to the wrong people etc. I haven't player with Buzz yet but signed up and admire them for thinking differently and trying to build something interesting.

jlarocco• 1 day ago

It's crazy how one lucky break lets somebody spend the rest of their life throwing s*t at the wall to see what sticks to earn them more money.

georgemcbay• 1 day ago

It's crazy how one lucky break lets somebody spend the rest of their life throwing s*t at the wall to see what sticks to earn them more money.

The "Zuckerberg Method".

He wasn't the first, and won't be the last, but I'm pretty sure he has thrown the most shit.

alex11383• 1 day ago

If by throwing shit you mean copy everybody

No other company in the internet age has done what Facebook has. Zuckerberg -

Copies every product he sees. Copied Twitter, Snapchat. Lifted features from Google+ Overwrite people's public-facing emails, which hurts being able to use competitive services https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4151433 Apparently wrote some tool which allowed for data transfer into FB from Myspace, but not the other way around (yes, I know. In many ways Myspace was hot trash, that doesn't mean he wasn't a malicious actor to extreme extents Blocked links to competition Other things I can't remember right now

Say what you will about Myspace, or Friendster, or Google+ (I'm annoyed as anyone they thought a great method to get people to use it was "ok, we'll ask you again later" on Youtube) but Facebook has always rigged the game, they've been bad actors

mmh0000• 1 day ago

Reposted from HN user notacoward[1]:

Entrepreneurship is like one of those carnival games where you throw darts or something.

Middle class kids can afford one throw. Most miss. A few hit the target and get a small prize. A very few hit the center bullseye and get a bigger prize. Rags to riches! The American Dream lives on.

Rich kids can afford many throws. If they want to, they can try over and over and over again until they hit something and feel good about themselves. Some keep going until they hit the center bullseye, then they give speeches or write blog posts about "meritocracy" and the salutary effects of hard work.

Poor kids aren't visiting the carnival. They're the ones working it.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15659076

darth_avocado2• 1 day ago

The fact that he does that instead of focusing on what he is already in charge of is egregious. If I was a Block shareholder looking at this, I’d be upset. It’s been years of him going on side quests like Tidal, blockchain, weekly etc. while ignoring the core needs of his customers and losing out on various fronts. Toast is a $20B company while Block is some $50B company after the acquisition of cash app (which by the way is a different conversation altogether) when Square should’ve had almost 90% market share is shameful.

The dude is clueless at the wheel and somehow people still keep giving him grace, when really he did a few things more than a decade ago and since then has mostly just fumbled around.

jjfoooo4• 22 hours ago

(I work for Block, not on this)

Cash App was not an acquisition, it originated as a hackweek within (what was then called) Square.

Possibly you’re thinking of the Afterpay acquisition?

Zigurd• 23 hours ago

More people should be doing that instead of funding cryptofascist authoritarian dunderheads to undermine democracy.

grim_io• 1 day ago

Marketing bullshit aside, this is just bots in chat rooms, right? Am I the crazy one?

malfist• 1 day ago

I think you're crazy. It's not just bots in chat rooms, it's bots in chat room with an AI Investor Hype Money™

windexh8er• 1 day ago

Kind of amazing that given the state of the world money is still focused on remixes of different forms of social engagement. Is this because it's an obvious place to display ads? Or is it something else?

I'd like to think if I were JD that I would be focusing on something a bit more tangible for the world. A more useful aspect of tech to emerge or be invested in.

But, apparently AI agents in chat that sit adjacent to code is The Next Big Thing?

noodlescb3• 1 day ago

Are you implying that a tech billionaire, who moved to a private South American compound, who looks like a man that microdoses ayahuasca daily, might just a rich kid tinkering to stay relevant without the incentive or context to actually BE relevant anymore?

serf• 1 day ago

yeah, but the reality is that every chat room bot integration is half-assed, and the good integrations force you to use chat rooms/services that are either a nuissance to spin up and join, heavily opinionated, or lack features, or even the most basic security and privacy stances.

there's definitely room for someone to do it right.

i'm skeptical if it'll be dorsey, however.

mplewis2• 1 day ago

b-b-but it has a github stapled onto it!

blitzar2• 1 day ago

Will someone please get these bots some NFTs

verdverm3• 1 day ago

I thought they were the ones that are supposed to be making them for me, and to make that digital coinage for me via the ai autonomous business proxy

jacobgold2• 1 day ago

Slack exists largely because IRC was insufficient. It didn't natively support channel history, search, etc.

For AI agents to flourish, Slack has to either truly open its network with a protocol or eventually be replaced.

I'd like to see Slack embrace an AT protocol-based chat system, which then apps like Buzz could implement. Then users could log in with domain handles like @yourname.com, and agents could use handles like @agent1.yourname.com, all under their complete control.

jhbruhn• 1 day ago

Just like Matrix and it's bot/puppet accounts.

_verandaguy2• 1 day ago

Why is it Slack's responsibility to help agents flourish?

I ask about Slack here because it's pertinent, but I've both seen and experienced firsthand this inversion across the industry where we must adapt our workflows for AI.

Isn't a tool supposed to work for you, not the other around?

MattDamonSpace• 1 day ago

It’s not Slack’s responsibility to do so, but it is their vulnerability if they don’t

Jare2• 1 day ago

Why is it Slack's responsibility to help agents flourish?

Technically, because if the world moves to AI-driven tools and Slack is not cooperating, it will no longer serve the world and will be left behind.

Isn't a tool supposed to work for you

If you want AI integration in your chat and Slack is not helping make it happen, then Slack is not working for you.

On the other hand, constantly chasing the latest fad can be a useless drain of resources and (worse yet) attention. In this context, AI is by now most likely not a fad, but the ways to interoperate with it can be: mcp, cli, agent, tag, ... And the same goes for users, reinventing their processes and practices 5 times per year.

shimman3• 1 day ago

You would like Cory Doctorow's concept of reverse centaurs.

calebkaiser• 1 day ago

I'm sympathetic to this POV. I think specifically in the case of Slack, it's not their responsibility in a cosmic sense, but it is in line with the direction and general promise they've been making to customers since forever.

A major part of Slack's go-to-market strategy for as long as I can remember has been pushing Slack as more than a interface for talking with teammates, but as a unified interface for generally piloting your business. Slack has heavily pushed ideas like "SlackOps", they've had Slackbot in the product forever, and they've always prioritized and sold integrations designed to let you build your business workflows in Slack. They even updated Slackbot to go from "that chatbot you DM to set reminders" to "Your AI teammate in Slack": https://slack.com/features/slackbot

So adapting to agents is in keeping with what Slack promises its users. I know that a lot of people don't want more AI features in apps that don't need them (i fall into this camp despite working in ML myself and using LLMs all day). I just think that in the case of Slack, their most passionate power-users are also the sort of people who do really want AI features.

Notion is probably a good companion here. It is similarly a really primitive utility--text editing--that has marketed itself as a sort of central interface for running your company. I know plenty of people, especially outside of engineering, for whom Notion is essentially their browser for work. And it's probably not a coincidence that the Notion + Slack are the two normal office software companies I can think of who've most heavily adopted and marketed AI features.

hahahaa5• 1 day ago

It is like asking in 1999 why DHL should have a website. Surely they can just meet people where they are - on the phone, on the high street. Why does everything need a bloody website.

olmo23• 9 hours ago

We also adapted our workflows to the invention of trains, shipping containers, the PC & the internet. I fail to see why AI would be so different.

charcircuit• 1 day ago

Slack already has an API for building bots. It doesn't need to be open.

verdverm3• 1 day ago

ATProto's tbd permission system is insufficient for the granularity needed in enterprise. Many of those features needed (like groups) will have to be built in an app view and by proxy be centralized. ACLs are two generations in the past of IAM history

Chat is also not a great modality for the PDS/ATP, Roomy learned this and is building a dedicated protocol and bridge.

jacobgold2• 1 day ago

There's a new feature being added to AT to support "permissioned data" that would handle a Slack-like use-case: https://github.com/bluesky-social/proposals/tree/main/0016-p...

noodlescb3• 1 day ago

I originally was passionate about Slack simply because it was "IRC but with modern quality of life improvements". Ever since they got fucked by MSFT and sold out to Salesforce, it's basically been dead in the water and the only changes have largely made it worse.

ryanmerket• 1 day ago

man i love IRC, and you're 100% right

rubysprite• 22 hours ago

More like HipChat. You are off by like 15 years

bensyverson• 1 day ago

Super ambitious, but maybe that's its downfall. It's hard to imagine incrementally adopting this.

lvl155• 1 day ago

As much as I detest Zuck, he was right about Twitter guys.

edoceo• 1 day ago

Any context for the ignorant?

alex11383• 1 day ago

I know that he referred to Twitter as "it's as if they drove a clown car into a gold mine and fell in"

Yes Zuck because a product that didn't constantly fuck around with people's privacy settings and had real real-world uses... sure, money is all that matters. You would know. Your vision of the web isn't liberation, it's "dumb fucks", that's all you think people are

pclowes• 1 day ago

How? I would argue Jack is a much better 0 to 1 guy than Zuck and Zuck is a better 1 to N guy

Jack: Twitter, Square (Block), Bluesky/ATProto, bitchat (interesting), buzz (we will see). He just always fumbles the 1 to N (See Vine as an example)

Other Twitter Guy: Medium

Zuck: PHP dev, gets a hit, reads innovators dilemma... buys instagram. Everything else sucks.

notthemessiah• 16 hours ago

You're right, but can we stick with Blue Ocean and Red Ocean as metaphors? 0 to 1 makes sense, but 1 to N loses it, and the whole framing reeks of pseudomathematics and math envy (which there is way too much of in the tech industry), when we have a perfectly good metaphor from competition in natural selection. Also the tech industry has way too much renaming-things-with-less-intuitive-terminology-to-seem-original.

fHr• 1 day ago

lol

ecliptik• 1 day ago

Google Buzz [1] along with Wave you both were too soon for this world.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Buzz

MPSimmons• 1 day ago

I was literally thinking this reminds me of Google+ and Buzz.

cryptoz• 1 day ago

Still can't make a Gmail label named 'Buzz'.

Melatonic• 4 hours ago

Know of any other labels that are blocked or taken ?

wslh• 1 day ago

Meanwhile, Jack Dorsey keeps working with Claude at https://github.com/permissionlesstech/bitchat

toomuchtodo• 1 day ago

Competing with https://tangled.org/ I suppose?

asdev• 1 day ago

No one is going to churn Slack for this just because it is "Agent First". Slack is more than good enough to tag Agents and will fill in the missing pieces slowly

teach3• 1 day ago

Slack's approach is NOT good enough, because the version of the Agent that lives in Slack cannot see the context of the Agent that lives inside Cursor on my developer laptop. They might be clones with identical brains, but they can't talk to each other or compare notes.

bigfishrunning3• 1 day ago

So why can't the cursor instance on your laptop have a slack bot? I've had a slack bot on my build machine written in chicken-scheme of all things for years, I feel like the great people (or clankers?) at cursor ought to be able to figure this one out

braebo• 24 hours ago

I would pay money to not have to use slack

rsstack2• 1 day ago

Explain Like I'm 5
Buzz is an open-source, self-hosted workspace that combines team chat, AI agents and Git hosting using signed Nostr events, so teams can keep control of their data.

Very different expectations of 5-year-olds.

serial_dev• 1 day ago

Hah, I used to tell my agents “eli5 (this task)”, then I started to worry that it will actually explain things as you would to a 5yo…

It’s just an irrational fear I have, in the end agents are not the HN comment section and they usually understand what I actually mean.

dgellow4• 14 hours ago

Ouch

adamrezich• 1 day ago

I imagine that's all very understandable to the average Bay Area five-year-old.

mlnj• 1 day ago

The goal is to replace these 5 year old with a team of Nostr aware agents. /s

joenot4432• 1 day ago

It’s kinda interesting seeing what, IIRC, was originally a subreddit name which spawned from an AskReddit thread, is now a common marketing phrase in the tech world.

Similar to the sub itself, it’s now just shorthand for “describe using the first principles the expected audience should understand.”

I imagine a lot of people in the industry also fondly remember the 2010s reddit experience.

rsstack2• 1 day ago

In this article, it's just an AI-generated TL;DR, tagline, sub-title box that was badly prompt-engineered and the website owners didn't care about its quality. I am pretty sure the entire website is an AI generated news aggregator.

breuleux• 1 day ago

The phrase was in an episode of The Office prior to that. I think it's fairly old.

hacker_88• 1 day ago

Are you smarter than a five year old, kinda show

al_borland• 1 day ago

I remember someone saying it in high school back in the late 90s or early 00s.

kyle-rb• 1 day ago

Not sure how long the subreddit has existed but I always assumed it was inspired by the episode of The Office where Michael asks Oscar to explain what a surplus is like he's 5. The broader usage on social media and the ELI5 shorthand are definitely the result of the subreddit though.

This article is definitely abusing the terminology, because I wouldn't expect even tech-knowledgeable people to know what Nostr is or does.

citizenkeen• 1 day ago

It’s way older than Reddit, it’s older than the Office. I remember Denzel Washington saying it in some movie when I was a kid, and I doubt it originated there. Doesn’t Einstein have a quotation about it, too?

forty• 1 day ago

"If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't understand it yourself." - Albert Einstein (allegedly :))

I always thought that the quote was with "5 year old" and that it was the reason for ELI5 :)

bryanrasmussen3• 16 hours ago

it’s now just shorthand for “describe using the first principles the expected audience should understand.”

I think at that it still fails pretty bad. I suppose the expected audience is quite a bit broader than people who would know or actually care what nostr events are. Maybe my expectation is off though.

mjg2• 1 day ago

Seriously, what's hope is left for adults when a 5 year old understands signed Nostr events? The ELI-SWE is the docs I guess? I want to get off the Silicon Valley marketing express.

pimlottc• 22 hours ago

They’re all digital natives now, dontcha know

inigyou2• 19 hours ago

I'm reading that Buzz is a buzzword, buzzword corpospeak jargon buzzword. Buzzword corpospeak.

Anyone know what it actually does?

dkdbejwi383• 10 hours ago

Extract money from venture capital

tys-• 17 hours ago

Just yesterday, left puzzled with the ELI5 I was given, I did the next reasonable thing… “ELI4”

rchaud• 5 hours ago

"Explain like I'm pitching to TechCrunch Disrupt".

colechristensen• 1 day ago

Hey I was prototyping this exact kind of thing, there's something to be said for releasing early.

The project fell to the back burner because I had VM ambitions and just didn't have enough disk space on my macbook to do VMs well. 512 GB and always full

jillesvangurp• 1 day ago

Bots in team chat is not a bad idea. I've been experimenting with that for a few months.

We started with Slack. This kind of works but dialing in the gazillion of permissions needed to end up with something that works is a bit painful. And you have to do this over and over again for each new bot.

So, we started experimenting with self hosted alternatives. First we tried Matrix. It's nice but a bit too strict on end to end encryption which gets in the way if you actually want to share information with bots. So, a few weeks ago we switched to Zulip. That's pretty straightforward to setup as well. It's very easy to create bot users with both and create some automations. We did some with Openclaw and I ended up replacing those with something coded around the haystack framework, which is a bit less of a messy basket case than Openclaw.

And as I discovered after I installed it, the Zulip leadership actually just got hired by Anthropic. It seems Jack Dorsey beat them to market making some announcements but I imagine that Anthropic might have very similar plans.

IMHO team level use cases for agents actually make a lot of sense. Companies are run by groups of people and the larger those groups the more team overhead you get. Perfect for optimizing with AI. And if you have people doing a lot of stuff with AI, that only adds to the need for them to communicate what they are doing and coordinating with others. Doing that out in the open in some shared channel makes a lot of sense. And having some shared team guard rails also makes sense. And if you think about more complex processes with handoffs between people (and possibly some agents), a team chat is a good place to do those as well.

sroerick2• 1 day ago

How about XMPP?

noodlescb3• 1 day ago

Interesting idea. I think the "multiplayer mode for AI development" bit resonates somewhat. Biggest problem is that I do think most companies have a ton of key contributors that find git/code intimidating, so part of me thinks the real answer here will be stuff like Surfboard, Town, etc. that can work with git AND the work tools in a more user friendly, browser-first way.

xnx• 1 day ago

Excited for "decentralized, self-sovereign, and open source."

Indifferent to "groupchat for agents".

alfons_foobar• 1 day ago

Am I the only one seeing _crazy_ levels of CPU usage when opening the project's homepage (https://buzz.xyz)?

Like "maxing-out-8-cores"-crazy?

lbrito• 1 day ago

Yeah, crazy that a landing page exhausts the resources of my 2019 CPU. Mouse movement tells me it runs at like 5FPS.

datadrivenangel4• 1 day ago

the more Tokens/CPU use the better your project. /s

mft_• 1 day ago

No, me too. 758% processor usage in Firefox.

dewey2• 1 day ago

I've recently built some project that also supports Nostr (https://getbirdfeeder.com, but more for the fun of playing with Nostr) but it feels very forced to use it for something like that. It feels like it's solving an issue that no team chat ever has.

Buzz is built around a self-hostable Nostr relay. Every message, reaction, workflow step, code event and approval is stored as a cryptographically signed event. Human employees and agents receive the same basic identity structure, including their own key pairs, channel memberships and audit trails.

dzonga• 1 day ago

jack dope product person & person in general - but CEO skills might be lacking.

minraws• 1 day ago

The name is probably not the best fit but if we can get a good solution that's not horrible that's easy to self host I and open-source I am fine with it.

Though I fear this might not be well maintained or have a good foundation being so heavily agent focused but I will out of sheer ambition of a more open stack support anything that help make it a possibility.

Also the git hosting stuff seems a bit sus tbh.

themgt• 1 day ago

That screenshot is some Lynchian horror. "#engineering. New direction, team – we're moving the prototype to Flutter" and then the humans and agent bots engage in flirty emoji-filled chats with cutesy names "I nailed the physics, UI shell @Honeybot?"

I'm trying to imagine a world in which this makes sense as a way to organize software development work, but coming up short. It's on a blockchain or something though, so there ya go.

https://github.com/block/buzz/blob/main/docs/assets/screensh...

theideaofcoffee• 1 day ago

It doesn't. But as long as it's a vibe-coded slop product shat out by one of the tech glitterati using the latest marketing wanketeering and sucking up tokens to power the in-built AI nonsense, it'll be eaten up.

The bubble can't pop soon enough.

slashdave• 23 hours ago

Oh, is this a thing?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/glitterati

people who are famous, wealthy

Oh, okay...

and attractive

lost me

echelon2• 19 hours ago

The bubble can't pop soon enough.

I'm getting months of work done in weekends.

There is no bubble.

The entire development world is being fundamentally rewired and will not ever look the same. This is just one experiment at a new shape. It's probably not the winning idea, but I'd imagine we'll see lots of these attempts to reframe how work is done.

This looks to me to be more oriented around agents and training than it says on the tin. It puts all the artifacts for learning about how projects are built, orchestrated, and managed in one place. That's a great data loop. Hook in observability, monitoring and alerting, incident management and SRE and they'll be cooking.

blitzar2• 11 hours ago

The bubble can't pop soon enough.

I am not ready for a new hype cycle based on whatever the imagineers come up with next.

Lalabadie• 1 day ago

It's also a capture made from seeded test data, all messages are at 5:42. Or a mockup based on said capture.

catmanjan• 10 hours ago

I think its an intentional mockup - perhaps the intent is to make it look like it all happened within a minute, and I'm sure they picked that time to imply that its something you could do after your 9-5... marketing is all so sinister.

hahahaa5• 1 day ago

Yeah just need to tell the system prompt to not do that. A grumpy senior engineer agent that pushes back on constant tech stack changes would be good too.

blanched• 1 day ago

Are you making a joke? Not being snarky, I actually can't tell if it's a real suggestion or satirical.

LaGrange• 22 hours ago

Don’t forget to light some candles and invoke the name of the Omnissiah while you’re at it.

lifty• 1 day ago

Nostr is not blockchain. It's a p2p protocol.

jayd16• 23 hours ago

Maybe they meant git? Not right either but less wrong.

Avshalom• 20 hours ago

Nostr isn't really p2p it's just that if you stick to text it's cheap to host a server

ohyoutravel• 22 hours ago

I would ask that someone shoot me in the face before I engaged with this slop.

wayeq• 21 hours ago

Me: Shoot me in the face, @cringebot

Cringebot: :salute: on it!

KennyBlanken• 21 hours ago

Every time I see some vibecoded AI slop project announcement where there is almost 1 emoji per line I want to reach out across the internet and punch the "author" in the face.

This shit is infesting every online discussion forum I'm in.

Terr_2• 17 hours ago

I have a premonition of future programming despair, and I wonder if it'll be like what Ian McKellen felt: A veteran of Shakespearean plays, doing all those [correction, not LoTR] The Hobbit green-screen shots interacting with no real person...

__________

McKellen said: "I felt pretty miserable … and thought perhaps, has the time come for me to stop acting altogether if I can't cope with these difficulties?" [...]
"It was so distressing and off-putting and difficult that I thought 'I don't want to make this film if this is what I'm going to have to do'," McKellen added. "It's not what I do for a living. I act with other people, I don't act on my own."

-- https://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/nov/20/the-hobbit-gand...

suladead• 16 hours ago

Soul engraving video seeing him go through that

latexr2• 8 hours ago

Moment of the breakdown (I couldn’t find a less shitty video).

https://youtu.be/CtYEm21Fhpo?t=79

Terr_2• 2 hours ago

P.S.: I want to make it clear that this isn't just about dealing with other humans. The dread I contemplate should affect even introverted shut-ins.

I want to reduce accidental complexity, discover and understand real problems, solve them well, and leave the world somehow better for it. Not just some infinitely process ping-pong of a hallucinated digital dollhouse fifteen levels removed from objective reality.

jorisw2• 15 hours ago

It's not really that Emoji filled. The screenshot is supposed to've been taken when a click on a heart reaction invoked a little animation.

I don't see anything about 'nailing' the physics either. It's just a design instruction.

kleiba23• 12 hours ago

Maybe it's just me, but when I was younger one reason that got me into AI research was the idea that one day we would have these seemingly intelligent entities that we could talk to and interact with just like we do with humans.

Now that we have that, everybody hates it.

Except me. I still like this. There might still be room for improvement, yes, but I think this is a cool attempt to making AI agents part of the team.

I think what could help make this better is investing into giving agents actual personality, instead of them being just sycophantic clones of each other. AI agents as team members should have clear aspects of distinction both in their abilities and behaviors.

Sharlin• 11 hours ago

Most people likely have a natural aversion against having "team members" without agency or consciousness. Giving them artificial, acted personalities would be even more horrible. LLMs are tools and trying to elevate them to the same level as actual humans is nuts.

(Yes yes, we can't know whether it "feels like" something to exist as bursts of vast numbers of matrix multiplications, but at least it would be a rather strange existence.)

moron4hire• 11 hours ago

I've been at my current company for just over three years. I manage a small team of developers at a medium-sized consultancy, building internal tooling for our data analysts.

One of my junior developers started the same day I did; we went through on boarding together. He's in his mid 20s, this is his second job post-college, after having an abysmal experience entering the workforce during COVID. He's had some struggles with learning to code but has taken my advice to build side projects for things he is interested in and has really started to take off. He got married last year and just last week bought a house.

One of my developers was a brand new junior, having started her first job post-college just a few months before I started at the company. When I first met her, she apologized to me. She hadn't done anything, she was just that kind of mousy person whose obviously been ground down by everyone around her for her entire life. I started making her deliver our project status updates. I also give her full projects that she works on her own with no input from me, other than whatever advice she herself asks of me. She finished her master's degree in computer science last year and also recently bought a house.

One of my more recent developers came to us from after 10 years of working on-site on military bases. She'd been stuck in a corner, made to maintain large legacy projects on her own, over looked for promotion her entire career. She's one of the best project managers I've ever seen. I have her deliver all of our presentations to the C-suite (and there are a lot of them). She just got engaged and I recently got her promoted for the first time in her career.

One of my former developers came to me from a different part of the company. He came to the company after being a medic on active duty in Afghanistan. His former team couldn't figure out what to do with him and when the contract on which he was working expired, they didn't bother to find a new one for him. He had told his supervisor he wanted to be a programmer, not an analyst, and somehow his supervisor knew I was looking for people. He was an absolutely terrible programmer. I spent multiple sessions a week working on mentoring him. Ultimately, I suggested he find another company and helped him find one that I thought would fit him better, something smaller, not in consulting, that could have more time to work directly with him, and kept him busy with documentation tasks until he could transition with no down time. He still sends me updates on LinkedIn. He also bought a house and is getting married soon. He loves his new job, misses our team, but says he's learning a lot more now.

Our company is one of the worst places to work as a software developer I've ever seen. Not quite the worst in that nobody is yelling at us or threatening us with violence, but our management has absolutely zero understanding of the business of software development. It's incompetent-bad, not evil-bad. The actual projects are ludicrously bad with no direction. My boss listens to me in our one-on-ones with bewildered eyes as I describe the cacophony of dumb ideas from our C-suite stakeholders, folks he has no involvement with because my team is matrixed out to internal work. He mostly just lets me do whatever I want as long as the timesheets get signed on time. I love working here. I also recently bought a house, my first one in my life. Oh yeah, we live in Northern Virginia, BTW, houses ain't cheap here. But I love working here despite all the product idiocy because I don't see my job as building software, I see it as building software developers.

Fuck calling a computer program a "teammate." A computer program is not going to have a brilliant and beautiful life. We only do any of this shit because it's in the service of people.

maeln2• 11 hours ago

I get it. I am still in love with the idea of having little bot and helper I can interact with. Realistic NPC, etc ... I think my current distrust and disappointment as many reasons that mostly boils down to imagination vs. reality.

The current generation of LLM takes a lot of resources to make, so of course it was made and pushed by the worst offender of late-stage capitalism. Giving an air of mercantilism, corporatism and general greed and unfairness already oh so common in our time. It's hard to see Claude as a cool entity and not exclusively made for profit, with all that entails. It's also (partly via the training data, partly via the proprietary system prompt and other safety mechanism) give the output a god awful personality. Sycophant, safe, easy language, no personality. And I have given up on trying tweaks to not have them sound like an incredible gigantic corporate-safe-speech dork.

Then there is all the limitation of LLM. We keep calling the current tech "AI", but they are as close to my own definition of AI than randomize decision tree npc where in early 2010 games. They can't do logic. They are a random number generator that are just insanely good at giving you the number that you want (which, I should emphasis, is absolutely crazy). Some techniques help with that, but the tech is fundamentally limited, which often make them frustrating.

conartist6• 10 hours ago

So you really place no value on talking to other people. I guess you must think that's not part of engineering

latexr2• 8 hours ago

these seemingly intelligent entities that we could talk to and interact with just like we do with humans.
Now that we have that, everybody hates it.

There are several reasons for it, most of them having to do with looking beyond what’s right in front of your nose. For many people, we don’t “have that”, LLMs are not comparable to interactions with humans. Then there’s all the shit around it such as the further consolidation of power in the hands of a few who really shouldn’t have it, the destruction of livelihoods, the increase in disinformation and propaganda, unhealthy habits and depression, and on and on.

Too many of these conversations focus only on the technology and completely ignore the context in which it exists. That lack of human perspective is a major reason why Hacker News is made fun of and dismissed relentlessly on other places on the internet (called “the orange site”), and everyone here is (wrongly) lumped as being a bunch of out-of-touch selfish nerds.

1shooner• 7 hours ago

I think what could help make this better is investing into giving agents actual personality, instead of them being just sycophantic clones of each other. AI agents as team members should have clear aspects of distinction both in their abilities and behaviors.

A language interface doesn't need a personality any more than a visual interface does. For most professional work, source data isn't written in the first person. Ego is an imposed product feature that wastes energy. What would the purpose of diverse personalities be? I want models as tools, not friends.

sharperguy• 11 hours ago

No blockchains here. Nostr is just a standard signed message format being relayed by simple store and forward relay servers.

tlongwell-block5• 8 hours ago

The screenshot is totally scripted. It’s from a video capture, which involves a few moving parts that are difficult to choreograph live with multiple humans and agents. You can see the PR for the scripted demo in the repo.

I wouldn't underestimate whimsy as a way to make fundamentally strange things feel intuitive. Bots are managed by people or orgs and can have different capabilities and authorization, so names and images are convenient shorthand for humans to distinguish these instances from one another. Whether or not you make them cutesy is entirely up to you.

2001zhaozhao• 1 day ago

I think a tool with this kind of UX is the future of engineering orgs. It reminds me a lot of JetBrains Space (which I already thought was a good idea back then), but with agents.

I don't see a lot of information about the Git hosting aspect of the product on the website, though. Somewhat doubtful that they will be able to make a Git forge with similar polish to GitLab

It subjectively seems to me that integrating with an existing forge (e.g. Forgejo) on the API layer and rebuilding the auth and frontend is a better bet. You get stable features like PRs, permissions and CI actions out of the box and they stay synced with known formats in the community and so make your tool easy to adopt. Though making a forge from scratch does have advantages especially for internal company use cases.

Another problem I see with Buzz is that the tool doesn't seem to be taking advantage of its vertical integration inside its UX enough. There is a lot more you can do with full control over Git hosting, project context, and org-wide chat in a single tool than what this tool attempts to do right now.

dredmorbius• 1 day ago

Earlier / dupe: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48995199>

throwawa14223• 1 day ago

Jack Dorsey has figured out how to make chat worse by adding LLMs.

bigfishrunning3• 1 day ago

I feel like chatGPT did that years ago...or maybe ELIZA?

browningstreet• 23 hours ago

We’re out of drinks. Can you two go get more wine coolers?

dstanko• 1 day ago

Interesting - if I or anyone else said they would be building a startup to do this, we would have a hard job to selling it to VCs.

hmokiguess• 1 day ago

I was trying to build something like that myself, but I had based it off IRC and was going to go protocol first not PaaS type of thing.

I think this is an unclaimed space where the future of work is bound to find itself in, though I'm not yet sure how/who is gonna win.

My solo project was abandoned unfortunately, that said I saw some cool protocol initiatives similar to it recently like this one: https://github.com/h5i-dev/h5i

ChrisArchitect• 1 day ago

Blog posts:

https://block.xyz/inside/introducing-buzz-where-humans-and-a... (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48995706)

https://engineering.block.xyz/blog/buzz (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48995199)

numpad0• 1 day ago

Jack Dorsey (@jack) said in an announcement on X

...

sulam2• 1 day ago

I feel like this might be solving a real problem (agents having identity, access controls, etc that are provisioned like you would a regular user) — with this Nostr layer that doesn’t really provide any specific value that I can see. So actions are signed, great — this is like telling me I’m going to be using blockchain to store my files because I need crypto on top of my crypto. We see where that ended up. Is Nostr doing anything here that is actually a value add, vs a processing tax that could be done more efficiently with a shared service?

sroerick2• 1 day ago

I had the same thought - but maybe it's good? I was thinking that if you have a decentralized store than you can connect to it regardless of dev environment. I've used XMPP for orchestration but I can see ergonomic advantages to this.

baron3dl3• 1 day ago

nostr solves for who owns the shared service. nobody. run your own, use an open relay, or pay for one from folks you trust.

designerarvid• 1 day ago

What problem is that a solution to? Is there a problem with someone owning it, in that case: what?

sulam2• 24 hours ago

The story right now is to own the least you possibly can, at least if you're a business. If I can buy it that's usually the right choice, in terms of opportunity cost if nothing else.

tlongwell-block5• 1 day ago

Nostr gives you and your agents a durable, portable identity across communities/relays/workspaces.

You can also independently verify that the messages you're reading came from the person/agent who sent them, even if the server/relay operator is broken or trying to trick you.

This can be important in environments that live outside of enterprise auth walled gardens.

barnabee2• 24 hours ago

I like that using keypairs and signed messages inverts the centralised server and SaaS model and makes things more local/client first. I wish more products would move that way.

Nostr seems like a reasonably convenient way to achieve that without building everything from scratch, but maybe there a better ways?

p2detar• 1 day ago

Too much talk about LLMs and too little about the self-hosting part of this project. Self-hosted stuff looks appealing to me. We dropped Slack as an option in the past because we couldn't self-host it.

whatthe12899• 1 day ago

this is shopify's river as a product?

fidotron2• 1 day ago

This is an interesting step in a fairly obvious direction.

I wonder how they plan to make mobile work, and it's amusing going with an xyz domain given their reputation.

nzoschke• 1 day ago

Very interesting!

As a small startup I'd love to ditch Slack, as its a walled garden and both under-featured and over-complicated at the same time. GitHub has been losing my favor too.

Tangentially our startups is combining email, AI agents (chat and coding), and GitHub workflows and it feels really good.

https://housecat.com/blog/gmail-durable-workflows-sandbox-vm

It feels like a renaissance for all workspace tools, where up until recently it was mostly dev tools that got all the really fun power ups.

oooyay2• 1 day ago

Disclaimer that I used to work at Slack

I love that we're challenging the status quo in chat. It feels like we've settled into an eternal September of sorts. I am somewhat bearish that Slack and Teams will survive, or rise to, the agent era.

That said, I'm curious whether NOSTR is really the protocol for this. For some really large corporations you're looking at a lot of clients (and their shadows like cellphones, local agents etc) as well as a lot of (likely) team-based agents.

The identity architecture makes sense for centrally hosted agents. Users also probably have their own personal agents as well. Do those just reuse user credentials or are they differentiated in some way? I couldn't tell.

I also am curious whether git really needs to be a dependency here. Like, maybe for Block it does, but it introduces a lot of complexity that I feel could be exported to merging VCS Host events to the Buzz event log.

I'm also curious what challenges will arise as new capabilities emerge. For instance, both Sol and Claude can now render native components in my chat window which is a massive leg up in terms of firming up a design change.

Rust is also a choice. I'm curious what alternatives the team considered and how they landed on Rust.

datadrivenangel4• 1 day ago

Shared information like code and files are increasingly important for keeping people and agents aligned, and "AI Native" businesses will become even more code heavy, so that makes sense.

ijustlovemath• 1 day ago

Why does Rust feel like a bad choice to you? In my experience shipping med device software, it's great for keeping the code that teams write cohesive and correct

oooyay2• 1 day ago

I'm not saying it's a bad choice. Slack is written in Hack, Discord written in Elixir, and Teams is written in C#. Why teams choose languages is always a point of curiosity to me.

WorldPeas• 1 day ago

I think a happy medium like signal would be much better, slack is an immovable part of much of the (white-collar) business relationship world now but it'd be nice if there were assurances of secrecy and security in communication as 24/7 cyberattacks rather than a company whose security is based solely on promises rather than zero-knowledge systems. Signal has had far and away the best cross-platform messaging experience of any client I've used in friend groups but moving to a slack-like system alongside what exists now would be much appreciated to the noisy channel approach.

tqi2• 4 hours ago

But why would a business want to have it's internal communications be on a platform like signal? none of the privacy features feel relevant to work related communications, if anything I think a company needs the ability to see all communications on platforms it uses for audit ability, collaboration, etc

ares623• 1 day ago

washed.xyz was taken

dwedge2• 1 day ago

It's interesting how my opinion of "Jack Dorsey launches X" is a total 180 from a decade ago. He just seems like a well-funded grifter to me.

bilsbie• 1 day ago

This is basically the ide of the future if you think about it. If bots do all the coding then this is where you’ll code.

tlongwell-block5• 1 day ago

Hi, folks

There's a brief write-up on Buzz here https://engineering.block.xyz/blog/buzz

philipwhiuk• 1 day ago

You start with this premise

It’s great and works really well for us, but it raises lots of questions. Does everyone get a bot? If people share one, whose credentials does it use?

Eventually you throw in this admission in the middle of other stuff:

Buzz gives each agent its own key. The agent’s owner signs a narrowly scoped authorization. The agent then signs its own work with its own identity.

So you're explicitly picking a bot per person, you're just calling them an agent. But you never really admit this because you call it 'an agent' rather than "the user's agent". You're still ending up with lots of agents each owned by people, you're just writing another orchestration layer yourself.

The agent remains the author. Its credential proves who authorized it and under what conditions.

Right yeh, so the human is the responsible party.

If an agent key leaks, revoke the agent without replacing the human identity behind it.

Just like you revoke an app-key on GitHub/Slack. This isn't a revolutionary thing you're doing.

You then throw in this curveball.

Buzz can also run an agent’s model requests on another community member’s machine.

How? How is this resource managed or limited? Do I have to assume Buzz will just borrow my laptop's CPU & GPU at random?

tlongwell-block5• 24 hours ago

Hi!

So you're explicitly picking a bot per person, you're just calling them an agent. But you never really admit this because you call it 'an agent' rather than "the user's agent". You're still ending up with lots of agents each owned by people, you're just writing another orchestration layer yourself.

Giving everyone their own agent/bot/app in Slack is nontrivial because of how Slack apps work. If you're okay with them impersonating you, it's easy, but that's weird and I don't like having to guess/discern if I'm talking to you or a bot wearing your face

How? How is this resource managed or limited? Do I have to assume Buzz will just borrow my laptop's CPU & GPU at random?

This is opt in. It's an integration with https://github.com/Mesh-LLM/mesh-llm that scopes shared compute to your Buzz community. This is very early right now and we're working to get it right. But the idea of a totally self-sovereign, self-hosted community providing its own inference is exciting.

GaryBluto• 1 day ago

Incredible. I don't think I've ever had the displeasure of visiting a website that has half a second of cursor movement lag before.

hathym• 1 day ago

I suffered before I was able to click on the button to open github repo

kristianc• 1 day ago

Would it be uncharitable to say we are reinventing all of the awful single pane of glass / enterprise orchestration platforms of the 2010s but making them 'fun'?

sim04ful• 1 day ago

Maybe I'm missing something, but it feels like the economics of software are shifting. If companies can afford software tailored to their exact workflows for less than the annual cost of a single engineer, what does the moat of a traditional SaaS company become?

rglover• 1 day ago

Convenience. Most companies aren't software companies and know this intimately. Even if they can build a prototype using LLMs, they now have to at a bare minimum hire someone who can maintain it (additional cost). Not to mention compliance with regulations. Far easier (and cheaper) to just pay someone else to make all of that their problem and extract the value from the product (even if it's not a perfect fit for their business).

julienb_sea• 24 hours ago

I think most companies have realized there is substantial value in terms of security maintenance, stability and the contractual obligations associated with SaaS vendors versus internal vibe-coded tools. Certainly there is a place for tailored internal tooling. But it isn't going to magically replace every use case that SaaS vendors are purpose built around solving, at least not anytime soon.

basilikum• 1 day ago

That Jack Dorsey?

unfunco• 21 hours ago

Yes, the tall Peter Dinklage.

fsuts• 14 hours ago

That made me laugh

pelagicAustral• 1 day ago

I honestly wonder how this brainstorming session started...

jscd• 1 day ago

Hot tip: if you disable JS on the site, then nothing but the title loads and you can disregard it without wasting all those CPU cycles.

bigbuppo• 24 hours ago

I think I'd rather retire than use that.

lxdlam• 24 hours ago

Disclaimer: I'm not working for them, just FYI.

Seems to be an raft.build competitor but open source.

BTW, from my very own opinion, IM is a great place for agents to chat, but not a good place for get work done. Something more comprehensive like Linear should be work better. Communication is a key stone but not all for the agents.

syngrog66• 23 hours ago

awful

xlayn• 22 hours ago

Let's make the whole working/colaborating environment a training input for the model, we have to replace each and every link of human everywhere, think about the stock prices... yes it will have cathastropic consequences to succeed but then think again when you vest in 40 years you will be rich!

and then the first reply is someone saying that if not someone else will... and then another saying that the whole idea of business is to make money... and then another that the guy from valve is a jerk...

kvisner• 21 hours ago

I'm curious how this will play out. So far having agents in a group chats with multiple people is hard. Either the agent creates a different "thread" internally for each user and everyone has a 1 on 1 convo with the agent in the same group chat, or it's just chaos.

elhosots• 21 hours ago

Jack Dorsey let the FBI and CIA run all through twitter under his ownership and stewardship

Why trust anything he does now ?

https://nypost.com/2022/12/24/latest-batch-of-twitter-files-...

bakies• 21 hours ago

People can report stuff to the moderation team on twitter.. big shock!

sbseitz• 21 hours ago

After selling Twitter to Elon, I trust Jack about as much as I trust Trump. And that's as far as I can throw Trump.

theptip• 21 hours ago

This could fill a useful niche. However I would assume Anthropic and OpenAI are going to build their own and steamroll in 6-12 months.

I did a dive recently on git forges for agent swarms. Radicle lacks an identity layer, the federated/COB model seems good. Tangled has no private repo story, though the social layer is solid; they also have an (IMO) awkward modeling of Issues as tweets at her than being owned by the repo.

So I think there is an opening for a private agent-first forge. (Before the HN dogpile, assume that if you don’t buy the value of agent swarms, you can ignore this whole thread.)

My concern for this project - Anthropic is explicitly building in this direction. Their latest product is Tag which is an auth model for running agents async within Slack. The obvious next feature to build from there is the forge; if GitHub gets disintermediated by the Agent UI, then Anthropic are free to swap out their own implementations behind the scenes. Multiplayer chat and repo/project management seem like the obvious next platform pieces to me. (This goes for any SaaS subscription of course, follow it to the N-hop logical conclusion.)

pksunkara• 6 hours ago

I am building a new code forge at https://juju.bi

It's not agent-first, but I can't think of any features that are needed for agents other than scalability.

JohnHaugeland• 21 hours ago

slackhubbingface by twitter guy?

every kind of no at once

tqi2• 19 hours ago

Forgive my ignorance, but what is the advantage of decentralization and cryptographically signed events in the context of a work chat/ coordination tool? Could a company not accomplish the same goal self hosting something like zulip?

ShinyLeftPad• 17 hours ago

Jack is invested in Nostr.

jrflowers• 18 hours ago

This guy wants people to use bitcoin for chat so badly and it is never going to happen, but it is kind of sweet that Jack Dorsey, through Nostr, was able to accomplish what Musk wants so badly: A social media platform only used by people that like him

kinakomochidayo2• 16 hours ago

Yep. Nostr is just a social network for Bitcoin maxis

mwkaufma• 18 hours ago

Buzz-word soup.

dackdel• 16 hours ago

the landing page is so insanely laggy. reeks of ai coded slop.

znnajdla• 16 hours ago

We need something like this and I have been thinking a lot about how to build it. Zulip is closest to what I want but quite untuitive to new employees. It would be fantastic to have one universal app to talk to Claude Code over SSH, employees in Slack-like team chat, and customers and external people over regular email. I want the semantics of email (thread based conversations, inbox zero, universally works with everything) with the UX and speed of Telegram. The protocol I am trying to design is something like SSH that gracefully degrades to POP3/SMTP/IMAP.

robertpohl• 16 hours ago

Do I use this instead if Github, or ontop of github?

bushbaba• 16 hours ago

Personally believe Jack has done more harm than good for his companies lately. It's time he resign.

sharts• 16 hours ago

Dorsey needs to just sit down and retire into obscurity.

kinakomochidayo2• 16 hours ago

Jack still trying to make Nostr relevant in 2026

vaylian• 15 hours ago

I also wonder how Nostr is useful here. The central idea of Nostr is that it's a lot harder to deplatform people, because a user can publish to several independent relays. Buzz is self-hostable, which removes the risk of deplatforming.

tlongwell-block5• 8 hours ago

You may want to participate in multiple communities hosted by different people, but with the same identity everywhere. Provably you to anyone that reads your messages.

pizzafeelsright• 7 hours ago

Nostr is a good protocol but Jack (i hope you read this) the real power comes from simplicity.

I assume Jack has money. I do not understand why building a product is the goal when the platform is where the communication transformation is needed.

nostr needs a type of simple dns for keys. Jack would understand.

SanjayMehta• 15 hours ago

Why's he posting on X and not bluesky?

rsingel• 14 hours ago

I can only hope that bigger companies go all in on agents integrated into slack-like software. More fake work, slower orgs, and easier targets for companies that prioritize building stuff over fetishizing overengineered IRC with emojis pretending to be productivity software.

cdnsteve• 14 hours ago

Companies are looking for more traceability in regulated environments. We have audit and compliance to deal with where the whole sdlc is under a microscope.

Does buzz help move us out of Jira hell, get off slack, teams or google chat? Does it get us off github enterprise?

I don't understand the problem this solves and how it could be reasonably used in a corporate environment.

virajk_31• 11 hours ago

Offtopic: I really love the idea of Nostr, BAN is LOCAL. haha!

nusl• 11 hours ago

I've built something quite similar, actually. It's quite a powerful workflow. Integrating multiple agents into chat with freeform comms is pretty fun, but I do find that you lose fidelity of what the agents are doing in terms of seeing actual changes, tool uses, and other things. The moat here does seem quite small, though.

liveoneggs• 10 hours ago

git notes is a good side channel that allows bots to keep context clues (aka chat with each other) with commits. I have a shell script wrapper for it but you don't need anything special. It works by putting a summary paragraph in the git note for your branch or every so often to answer "how did we get here?" or "what is the intention of this code?"

You can do stuff like have claude keep up with all the active branches and then the notes can help keep everyone pointed in the same direction.

mawadev• 8 hours ago

It is either me or you

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCkJ5lGPqFs

Kuyawa• 8 hours ago

"Sorry, you have been blocked"

Whatev

Jack Dorsey launches Buzz to combine team chat, AI agents and Git hosting

Related Stories