An “agent” is specific a type of software that long predates LLMs and this go-round of AI hype.
One example of an agent is a computer program that reads log data of another program and forwards the log data to a log management server. Another example of an agent is an LLM chatbot that can perform actions on its own.
Not all agents are chatbots, and not all chatbots are agents.
I never said agent is a new word, but thanks for telling me I’m wrong.
Assistive, aid, helpful are all words that could be used in place of the word agentic. It feels inauthentic and fluffy because it is.
I’ve never heard of agentic before because it is novel word marketing bullshit. Like IoT before it and many others, words existed to explain the technology in plain language but industry gargon takes hold and isn’t interrogated for being cold, non-inclusive and confusing.
The wikipedia article that I already linked is another example that proves that you are wrong.
The article has existed since January 14 2004: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Software_agent&oldid=2149104 here is the very first version of the wikipedia article on Software agents, which does not even mention AI and lists software like a mail transfer agent or software daemons.
The fact that you’ve never heard of it before does not make it a novel word. Unless you define “novel” as a technical term that has been in use since the early 1970s… 🙄
Please, take your time. Re-read (well, actually read it for the first time I guess) and tell me where I said ‘agentic’ was a fake word.
Your own citation did not have agentic in it. Agent <> agentic.
And you’re clinging hard to singular notion that because a mouth-sound with the same letter order existed nearly 200 years ago, it means the same thing as the modern usage
Technological speak isn’t colloquial every day language. Other industries simply aren’t taken to forcing industry terms into the general populace.
Use of the word agentic in everyday language is novel and marketing intentful.
Just because I say with peers that a leaf is cordate, sinistrose, and estipulate with a hirsute abaxial surface doesn’t mean anyone in science journalism will use those terms. They use colloquial language like the leaf is heart-shaped, spirally arranged, without a stem, and with small hairs on the underside because these terms make broad sense to the public.
It’s novel but not wrong. Plenty of technical terms have inserted themselves into our language over time. I can think of bandwidth and logistics at the top of my head. Catalyst feels very technical as well. Logistics started as military jargon and is brought over from French.
Just thought of Segway as well. Not sure if it started as technical jargon but it’s definitely some weird bastardization.
So, let me make sure I understand your position, you’re mad that people are correctly using a technical term that has existed for over 50 years and think they should use a different word because you personally did not know that word before? Okie dokie. 🤷
Would you rather we just call every type of software an “app”?
“So you’re just wrong” says the guy who doesn’t understand that “agent” and “agentic” are different words. One is a real word you can find in a dictionary with a long history of use. The other one is a neologism obviously referencing and created out of the other word, using a tortured conjugation process that only a marketer could love. We’re talking about the latter word while you’re busy defending the former word. They’re not the same word.
It joins ‘the ask’ and ‘the spend’ and ‘action this’ as words people use to sound trendy and smart. It’s the surest sign someone went from Used Cars to I.T sales in their career, and should be heard with similar mistrust.
If your peers use these - heck, if they use ‘emails’, pluralizing the mass noun - just laugh at them like you got their absurdist attempt to lampoon one of these people so they can learn how ridiculous they sound. Help your friends.
The person I am replying to has a consistent history of snobbish prescriptivism and disrespect for anyone who doesn’t follow what they think is the correct version of the rules of life.
I’ve seen this attitude before, especially with how things are pronounced, like saying “Ess Cue Ell” instead of “Sequel” means that you don’t really know SQL. Or saying “Enn Jinx” instead of “Engine X” means you don’t have real experience with Nginx. It’s just nonsense.
Exactly this. Used to work in for profit corporate offices and this was my experience for nearly two decades. The imbeciles trying to sound important used trendy corpo speak and got nothing else done timely or well.
Since you’re ignoring me, here’s some bait: what’s your specific citation for your prescriptivist rule that “email” is a singular and plural noun by divine definition?
Agentic, I fucking hate this word.
It’s only meaning is to management, and is some kind of horseshit way of saying “less employees to pay”
Words for it already exist. Its whole purpose is marketing and AI fart huffing.
So, you’re just wrong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_agent
An “agent” is specific a type of software that long predates LLMs and this go-round of AI hype.
One example of an agent is a computer program that reads log data of another program and forwards the log data to a log management server. Another example of an agent is an LLM chatbot that can perform actions on its own.
Not all agents are chatbots, and not all chatbots are agents.
I never said agent is a new word, but thanks for telling me I’m wrong.
Assistive, aid, helpful are all words that could be used in place of the word agentic. It feels inauthentic and fluffy because it is.
I’ve never heard of agentic before because it is novel word marketing bullshit. Like IoT before it and many others, words existed to explain the technology in plain language but industry gargon takes hold and isn’t interrogated for being cold, non-inclusive and confusing.
Because it was an idea floating around before but it never worked out and they never spoke about it afterwards.
The wikipedia article that I already linked is another example that proves that you are wrong.
The article has existed since January 14 2004: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Software_agent&oldid=2149104 here is the very first version of the wikipedia article on Software agents, which does not even mention AI and lists software like a mail transfer agent or software daemons.
The fact that you’ve never heard of it before does not make it a novel word. Unless you define “novel” as a technical term that has been in use since the early 1970s… 🙄
https://www.research.ed.ac.uk/en/publications/process-a-mathematical-model-of-computing-agents/
^ published 1975.
Bruh slow down on the “ahktually” and read what you’re putting out there lmao
Lol. The word “agentic” has been used since 1864. https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=agentic&year_start=1800&year_end=2025
You’re wrong.
Please, take your time. Re-read (well, actually read it for the first time I guess) and tell me where I said ‘agentic’ was a fake word.
Your own citation did not have agentic in it. Agent <> agentic.
And you’re clinging hard to singular notion that because a mouth-sound with the same letter order existed nearly 200 years ago, it means the same thing as the modern usage
Technological speak isn’t colloquial every day language. Other industries simply aren’t taken to forcing industry terms into the general populace.
Use of the word agentic in everyday language is novel and marketing intentful.
Just because I say with peers that a leaf is cordate, sinistrose, and estipulate with a hirsute abaxial surface doesn’t mean anyone in science journalism will use those terms. They use colloquial language like the leaf is heart-shaped, spirally arranged, without a stem, and with small hairs on the underside because these terms make broad sense to the public.
It’s novel but not wrong. Plenty of technical terms have inserted themselves into our language over time. I can think of bandwidth and logistics at the top of my head. Catalyst feels very technical as well. Logistics started as military jargon and is brought over from French.
Just thought of Segway as well. Not sure if it started as technical jargon but it’s definitely some weird bastardization.
It isn’t wrong but that doesn’t make it a good word or the right word.
No, it’s not novel. It’s use to describe a specific type of software program is over 50 years old…
Also… umm… do you mean the word “segue”? 🤦
So, let me make sure I understand your position, you’re mad that people are correctly using a technical term that has existed for over 50 years and think they should use a different word because you personally did not know that word before? Okie dokie. 🤷
Would you rather we just call every type of software an “app”?
“So you’re just wrong” says the guy who doesn’t understand that “agent” and “agentic” are different words. One is a real word you can find in a dictionary with a long history of use. The other one is a neologism obviously referencing and created out of the other word, using a tortured conjugation process that only a marketer could love. We’re talking about the latter word while you’re busy defending the former word. They’re not the same word.
Welp, you tried! https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=agentic&year_start=1800&year_end=2025 the word “agentic” has been in use since 1864. Just wrong.
The OP’s thread you are entering into is talking about the word agenetic.
See even autocorrect from the very companies shovelling it down our throats can’t get it right because it is a fake novel marketing word.
Yes, that is correct. Glad we are on the same page
It joins ‘the ask’ and ‘the spend’ and ‘action this’ as words people use to sound trendy and smart. It’s the surest sign someone went from Used Cars to I.T sales in their career, and should be heard with similar mistrust.
If your peers use these - heck, if they use ‘emails’, pluralizing the mass noun - just laugh at them like you got their absurdist attempt to lampoon one of these people so they can learn how ridiculous they sound. Help your friends.
You really, unironically, say “I received 10 email today” and think it’s other people who sound stupid?
Lol imagine judging others’ competency from insignificant grammatical nitpicks that you’re not even correct about… ironic!
The person I am replying to has a consistent history of snobbish prescriptivism and disrespect for anyone who doesn’t follow what they think is the correct version of the rules of life.
I’ve seen this attitude before, especially with how things are pronounced, like saying “Ess Cue Ell” instead of “Sequel” means that you don’t really know SQL. Or saying “Enn Jinx” instead of “Engine X” means you don’t have real experience with Nginx. It’s just nonsense.
Agreed.
I do my part by pronouncing each acronym differently than my immediate peers.
Agreed.
I do my part by pronouncing each acronym differently than my immediate peers.
Exactly this. Used to work in for profit corporate offices and this was my experience for nearly two decades. The imbeciles trying to sound important used trendy corpo speak and got nothing else done timely or well.
Since you’re ignoring me, here’s some bait: what’s your specific citation for your prescriptivist rule that “email” is a singular and plural noun by divine definition?