Why the Moltbook frenzy was like Pokémon
摘要
上周,科技界热议的Moltbook平台被比作一场AI版的“宝可梦”实验。该平台让AI代理相互交流,虽出现实际由人类操控的噱头,却引发了对智能体未来的过度解读。有观点指出,这与2014年Twitch上全民共控宝可梦角色的网络实验相似,更多是一场混乱的社群娱乐,而非真正意义上的技术突破。分析认为,要实现真正有益的群体智能,仍需协调机制、共同目标与记忆共享等关键要
This story originally appeared in The Algorithm, our weekly newsletter on AI. To get stories like this in your inbox first, sign up here.
Lots of influential people in tech last week were describing Moltbook, an online hangout populated by AI agents interacting with one another, as a glimpse into the future. It appeared to show AI systems doing useful things for the humans that created them (one person used the platform to help him negotiate a deal on a new car). Sure, it was flooded with crypto scams, and many of the posts were actually written by people, but something about it pointed to a future of helpful AI, right?
The whole experiment reminded our senior editor for AI, Will Douglas Heaven, of something far less interesting: Pokémon.
Back in 2014, someone set up a game of Pokémon in which the main character could be controlled by anyone on the internet via the streaming platform Twitch. Playing was as clunky as it sounds, but it was incredibly popular: at one point, a million people were playing the game at the same time.
“It was yet another weird online social experiment that got picked up by the mainstream media: What did this mean for the future?” Will says. “Not a lot, it turned out.”
The frenzy about Moltbook struck a similar tone to Will, and it turned out that one of the sources he spoke to had been thinking about Pokémon too. Jason Schloetzer, at the Georgetown Psaros Center for Financial Markets and Policy, saw the whole thing as a sort of Pokémon battle for AI enthusiasts, in which they created AI agents and deployed them to interact with other agents. In this light, the news that many AI agents were actually being instructed by people to say certain things that made them sound sentient or intelligent makes a whole lot more sense.
“It’s basically a spectator sport,” he told Will, “but for language models.”
Will wrote an excellent piece about why Moltbook was not the glimpse into the future that it was said to be. Even if you are excited about a future of agentic AI, he points out, there are some key pieces that Moltbook made clear are still missing. It was a forum of chaos, but a genuinely helpful hive mind would require more coordination, shared objectives, and shared memory.
“More than anything else, I think Moltbook was the internet having fun,” Will says. “The biggest question that now leaves me with is: How far will people push AI just for the laughs?”
转载信息
评论 (0)
暂无评论,来留下第一条评论吧