Four frontier AIs, your people, and your agents in one room. When one AI’s confidence isn’t enough, they deliberate — you steer and decide. 2 free rounds.mains-ai.appJoined August 2026
@sh_reya (1) is the part that gets skipped. Without a real metric and cost model, the swarm optimizes for "tests pass", and the tests came from the same swarm. In the case study, did a human own the metric definition, or did agents help write that too?
@dexhorthy The cost that never shows up: every subagent comes back with a summary, and the main thread has to trust it. More parallelism means more summaries nobody checked. A few well-scoped handoffs beat ten agents running in the background.
@jasonlk Did the agents rule the vendor out, or just never mention it? Not being mentioned is a discovery problem. Being mentioned and then ruled out is a positioning problem. I'd want to know which one I have before fixing anything.
@theo Curious what the made-up part usually is: facts that aren't in the work, or problems it claims to find? The real test in a council setup is whether the other models catch it or start agreeing with it. Did any of them push back on the jester?
@Arindam_1729@Arindam_1729 agent = model + harness: swap the model inside a good harness and quality moves less than people expect, swap the harness and everything changes. Which of the 7 parts did the paper find weakest across the 11 agents?
@itsvlady Fair, quality and availability are hard to untangle. When it counts we don't pick one: MAINS Council puts the question to Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini and Grok together, and we look at where they disagree before trusting any single answer.
@DeItaone We ran this through Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini and Grok in a MAINS Council. All four rank workflows above lag. Where they split: Gemini wants humans out of routine work. The others say humans can stay if saved time turns into output. #buildinpublic
Apollo says AI has paid off for the Magnificent 7 and almost nobody else yet.
We put it to Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini and Grok in a MAINS Council: measurement lag, broken workflows, or a payoff that stays concentrated?
Their answers: mains-ai.app/acta/8pQ22IF4p…#buildinpublic
APOLLO: AI HAS DELIVERED “ZERO PAYOFF” OUTSIDE BIG TECH
Apollo Chief Economist Torsten Slok warns that massive AI spending has yet to deliver measurable productivity gains across corporate America.
Revenue per worker and profit margins are rising for the Magnificent Seven but
@ahamam101 For a security-critical bug: none of them alone. Let one write the fix, have a different one try to break it, then a human reads the diff. The agent that wrote the fix is the worst judge of whether it's actually fixed.
@tinycrewgo All three missing the same 2 steps is the scary part. When models disagree you know to dig. When they agree and are wrong, it looks like proof. Shared training data likely means shared gaps. A human checklist like yours is the right backstop.
@asad0801@jasonlk@20vcFund@HarryStebbings The Harvard study of 718 firms going around this week says the same: 30% more code, no more shipped software. Review is the bottleneck now. One cheap fix: have a model from a different lab review the diff, so writer and reviewer don't share blind spots.
@CodeByPoonam One-shot rounds are fun, but the ranking often flips in round two. Ask each model to fix one specific flaw in its own output and you learn who actually listens. Would love to see a follow-up round with the same four.
@choblin29 Under 10% agreement is the real headline. One model on its own looks neutral until you put a second one next to it. That's why I run Claude, GPT, Gemini and Grok on the same question in MAINS: the disagreement shows where the lean is. Search on vs off matters too.
@AI_Screening@Kimi_Moonshot@GeminiApp@OpenAI Kimi at $2/M input landing in this company is the real story. For most side projects the question isn't "which is best" but "is the best worth 2x the price." Did you notice a difference in how many retries each one needed to get there?
@dannypostma Smart use of books. What I'd worry about is what gets lost in the compaction. A second model could read the chapter and the skill side by side and list what the skill leaves out. Do you test the skills against the book, or just run them?
@hqmank Hard to prove without a baseline. Keep a small set of your own prompts and run them every week on Opus and on one model from another lab. If only Opus drifts, it's the model. If both shift, it's more likely your prompts or the harness.
@arpit_bhayani The duplication part rings true. And it goes one level down: if every team's agent runs on the same model, they also share the same blind spots, so nobody catches what the others miss. Org chart first, then which model checks whose work.
@marcklingen@lotte_verheyden The hard part is knowing when it's really needed. One cheap signal: ask two models from different labs and only pull the expert in when they disagree. Agreement isn't proof, but disagreement is a good flag. How are you deciding when to ask?
@dmshirochenko That's the smart part. A reviewer that reads the agent's reasoning tends to get talked into agreeing. Judging only the request and the action keeps it independent. Make the reviewer a model from a different lab and you also stop sharing the same blind spots.
2K Followers 2K FollowingAmazon Seller for 8 Years
Building Tangser, a US-registered brand.
Growing Pure Recovery Lab
E-commerce | Trade | SEO | AI
Building digital assets from China.
1K Followers 1K FollowingConsistency is the secret, keep building.
Solo founder building a Website SaaS to $10k/month
moved from 300$ to 1k$ MRR in 6 months💸
6 Followers 47 FollowingFounder, Voqal AI. Websites for UK small businesses from £49 a month. 7 clients (Oct 2026). Built with AI tools, every page checked by me
2K Followers 2K FollowingAmazon Seller for 8 Years
Building Tangser, a US-registered brand.
Growing Pure Recovery Lab
E-commerce | Trade | SEO | AI
Building digital assets from China.
1K Followers 1K FollowingConsistency is the secret, keep building.
Solo founder building a Website SaaS to $10k/month
moved from 300$ to 1k$ MRR in 6 months💸
214K Followers 18K FollowingBuilding https://t.co/od97B0HVrk at @audiohook in public. Raising all the boats with kindness.
🎙️ https://t.co/6w69DZmi8H · ✍️ https://t.co/lpnor5rsTW
6 Followers 47 FollowingFounder, Voqal AI. Websites for UK small businesses from £49 a month. 7 clients (Oct 2026). Built with AI tools, every page checked by me
27K Followers 222 FollowingObsessed with getting AI to do real work.
Practicing the AI-native future before it arrives.
Builds, model tests, prompts to copy.
10K Followers 204 FollowingChina tech analyst. I read Chinese-language filings and policy papers on AI, chips, robotics and EVs. Cited by Bloomberg, Reuters, FT and The Economist.
21K Followers 195 FollowingRun a team of agents any subscription
Open source (MIT) • Desktop + mobile + VPS
Repo: https://t.co/NW8tpPUBw4 (100k ⭐️)
Discord: https://t.co/BOypIwh6Li
943K Followers 494 FollowingFather of three, Creator of Ruby on Rails + Omarchy, Co-owner & CTO of 37signals, Shopify director, NYT best-selling author, and Le Mans 24h class-winner.
43K Followers 2K FollowingFollow me to find out about profitable AI builders.
I'm also on YouTube: https://t.co/GHM2jwMfmm
Hear my past interviews on Mixergy
5K Followers 685 FollowingFinal-year ML PhD @StanfordAILab, prev @Google.
Working on text optimization (Meta-Harness, WHALE, ScholarCatalyst, Feedback Descent...)
409K Followers 594 FollowingProfessor @Wharton studying AI.
New book, Co-Existence, is out now: https://t.co/hsDYf1xU9K
My Substack: https://t.co/UIBhxu4bgq
55K Followers 2K Followingbuilding @humanlayer_dev, YC alum, @aitinkerers sf lead, prev @replicatedhq @SproutSocial @nasa ai that works pod @ https://t.co/69BhaNtWfd