yeah, i think a lot of people on hacker news basically agree with that old meme that says "The most recent piece of technology I own is a printer from 2004 and I keep a loaded gun ready to shoot it if it ever makes an unexpected noise."
i'm guessing that part of accenture's consulting business is helping people navigate the trademark registration process. so they've got to hype up the ®.
right, but if you have 300 employees using ai and you want to share a skill with all of them, and you want to be able to push an update to the skill, mcp provides you with a standard way to do that.
i dont understand why people are so invested in making this a winner-take-all battle. skills are ligthweight and ad-hoc, MCP is managed and centralized. there's a place for both of those things, even if your personal workflow only needs skills.
We have b2b enterprise solutions for sharing text files; we have 1st party, security approved methods for distributing source code that are fundamentally business friendly and compatible with using skills.
MCP might have a place, but claiming it exists because you need a more “enterprise” solution to distributing prompts is just enormously difficult to justify.
(Unless, as the other peer comment indicates, you're not actually trying to make things better or useful, you're trying to sell access to your MCP server. I admit, I take it back; if shilling your company is all you care about maybe MCP is a better option)
for developers working in claude code, sure. but there's ai users who don't use claude code. chatGPT business and enterprise tiers integrate with MCP servers controlled by your organization admin.
i think it is on purpose, but not for the cynical reason of burning more tokens. developers like knobs, it helps us feel like we're in control. even when we're not.
so the ai companies give us knobs and buttons and sliders to make us more comfortable.
"shift left" on the battlefield. break down those silos. if you have to ask for permission it's already too late. remember the goal. find the bottlenecks in your system and remove them.
In many battlefield scenarios, there is more than one "somebody" on it. The "somebody" that you kill might not be the "somebody" that you intended to kill.
Depending on the how pelicans are created, it is entirely possible to indirectly kill "somebody" due to the externalised costs of global warming etc.
i've gone down this route before, we're back on freshdesk now. it's easy to build a prototype in two days, but the long tail of making it actually meet _all_ the requirements is hell.
the value platforms provide is that _you_ didn't make the software, somebody else did, so somebody else defines the functionality and workflow of the software. it can be treated as fixed, and a thing that people learn how to use. they have support docs and training resources for your staff to access. when somebody has a problem, you can tell them to make a ticket with freshdesk not with you.
if you make the software in-house, you have to also make all those training resources yourself. you have to make all the ui decisions. and you have to defend those ui decisions, even when each of your support staff wants something different, and knows there's nothing preventing you from changing it to exactly what they want. even when exactly what they want contradicts with what the person sitting next to them wants.
most jurisdictions mandate some minimum noise level for pedestrian safety, and cars have to implement artificial noise at low speeds to meet that requirement. (above a fairly slow speed, the tire noise is more than loud enough)
reply