AI时代的神话"人-月"
上个周末我看到四个人拼命地想用笔记本电脑连接屏幕我很高兴看到他们的努力无意加入
但有人逼我：你就不能看看吗？
我回答："哈哈，对不起，不！我的经验是，增加更多的人不会更快地解决这个问题".
我当然是 -- 间接的 -- 回到布鲁克斯的律法：
"在晚期软件项目上增加人力以后就会这样"
它由计算机科学家小弗雷德里克·P·布鲁克斯(英语：Frederick P. Brooks Jr.)根据其管理IBM OS/360项目的经验而在其1975年的"神话人物-蒙斯"一书中所制定。
不管怎样，我总得想想在AI agents和LLMs的年代，这是否仍然维持下去？
乍一看，传统的瓶颈 -- -- 登机时间、无休止的站立和办公政治 -- -- 一夜之间消失。 AI agent以毫秒的速度达到速度，不需要咖啡休息。
但当你仔细看，而法律并没有消失。 它只是变了。
著名的“婴儿问题”依然存在：9个agents仍无法在一个月内接生。 顺序任务仍然相继进行。
外头并没有消失；它变了：你现在不是在管理人，而是在管理agents. 仍然有人需要定义"done"，审查代码，捕捉出幻觉，并把碎片缝合在一起。
那个人就是你
将9个自发的agents扔入一个没有晶体清澈管弦乐的单一密码库，他们将愉快地将彼此的工作重写为高速回路。
也许2026年更新的布鲁克斯法应该是：
"把agents添加到一个要求不明确的项目上，会更快地得到错误的答案".
本文由 AI宝库自动抓取并翻译，版权归原作者所有；如需查看原文请点下方链接。
The Mythical Man-Month in the age of AI
Last weekend I watched four people desperately trying to get a laptop to connect to a screen. I was happily observing their efforts, with zero intent to join in.
But someone nudged me: can't you have a look at it?
My reply: "Haha sorry no! My experience is that adding more people will not solve this problem any quicker".
I was of course -- indirectly -- reffering to Brooks's Law:
"Adding manpower to a late software project makes it later."
It was formulated by computer scientist Frederick P. Brooks Jr. in his 1975 book The Mythical Man-Month, based on his experience managing the IBM OS/360 project.
However I got to thinking. Does this still hold up in the age of AI agents and LLMs?
At first glance, you’d think no. The traditional bottlenecks -- onboarding time, endless stand-ups, and office politics -- disappear overnight. An AI agent is up to speed in milliseconds and doesn't demand a coffee break.
But when you look closer, and the law hasn't vanished. It just mutated.
The famous "Baby Problem" remains: nine agents still can’t deliver a baby in one month. Sequential tasks are still sequential.
Overhead hasn't disappeared; it shifted: instead of managing people, you are now managing agents. Someone still needs to define "done", review the code, catch hallucinations, and stitch the pieces together.
That someone is you.
Throw nine autonomous agents at a single codebase without crystal-clear orchestration, and they will happily rewrite each other's work in a high-speed loop.
Maybe the 2026 update to Brooks’s Law should be:
"Adding agents to a project with unclear requirements gets you the wrong answer faster."
Auto-fetched and translated by AI Gem Box. All rights belong to the original author.