Joined December 2023
B站一兄弟做的赛博女友,太有感觉了! 纯本地运行的 AI 女友,不联网,不用 API key。 VAD:Silero VAD v5 STT:Whisper LLM:本地 llama.cpp TTS:Qwen3-TTS 四个模型全部塞进 15G 显存,且可自由热切换。 基于开源项目 speech-to-speech 改造。 我的codex啥时候能这样?😂
218
407
54
3,430
673,021
卧槽,全体起立,这次终于拆明白了!!! 在抖音自己开播的「赛博小雅」,那张脸是 Vidu S2 实时生成的 录屏右上角写着「数字人 Vidu S2」。弹幕里有人喊「说个方言」「Sing a song」,她就在直播间跟观众实时聊。 顺手更正一句:上条说她「全本地、不用 API key」,那是 7 月那版。开直播这版,脸换成了云端的 Vidu S2。 说人话,一个 AI 主播就 4 个零件: 1. 耳朵:每 20 秒抓一条弹幕 2. 大脑:大模型 + 一份人设,决定回什么 3. 嘴巴:TTS 念出来,10~20 秒录音就能克隆音色 4. 脸:一张照片,实时生成 720p 会说话、会动的视频 以前最难的是脸,要建模、动捕、堆显卡。现在 Vidu S2 一个 API 搞定,官方「实时版」还把耳朵、大脑、嘴巴一起打包了。 🔥普通人照着配: 1. 一台普通电脑就行,脸在云端渲染,不用显卡 2. 准备 Vidu API Key、一张形象图、一段声音样本、一份人设 3. 用抖音直播伴侣或 OBS 采集数字人窗口,开播 💰费用:按官方定价,实时版每分钟约 2.8 元,一小时约 169 元。想用自己的大模型和音色,选「组件版」,只让 Vidu 画脸,每分钟约 1.9 元。 🎁新用户官方送 5000 积分(限 2000 份),够实时版跑 55 分钟左右: 控制台 → 账号总览 → 使用邀请码,填「RG4JO9HIAQ」 (国际版用「K5KXO1PLIF」) ⚠️抖音规定:虚拟人形象要先注册,背后的真人要实名,直播得有真人实时驱动,不允许纯 AI 自己播。想挂机 24 小时躺赚的,可以歇了。 想自己搭一个的,先收藏🙂 传送门👇🏻 文档:platform.vidu.cn/docs/api-re… 定价:platform.vidu.cn/docs/overvi…
两个多月前我发过一条:B站一兄弟做了个纯本地的赛博女友。 那条 48 万人看过,收藏比点赞还多,3790 个人默默存下来了。 今天刷抖音,我愣住了—— 这个作者,已经让「赛博小雅」在抖音开直播了。 不是剪辑,不是录播,是 AI 自己在直播间跟观众实时聊天。 回头看一下她是什么做的: ✅ 不联网、不用 API key,全本地跑 ✅ 听:Silero VAD + Whisper ✅ 想:本地 llama.cpp ✅ 说:Qwen3-TTS ✅ 四个模型挤在 15G 显存里 一张消费级显卡,从一个开源项目开始,到一个能开直播的"虚拟主播"。 一个人,两个月。 我录了一段,你们自己感受下👇 我的 codex 还在帮我改 bug,人家的 AI 已经出去挣钱了😂
24
58
7
419
49,906
两个多月前我发过一条:B站一兄弟做了个纯本地的赛博女友。 那条 48 万人看过,收藏比点赞还多,3790 个人默默存下来了。 今天刷抖音,我愣住了—— 这个作者,已经让「赛博小雅」在抖音开直播了。 不是剪辑,不是录播,是 AI 自己在直播间跟观众实时聊天。 回头看一下她是什么做的: ✅ 不联网、不用 API key,全本地跑 ✅ 听:Silero VAD + Whisper ✅ 想:本地 llama.cpp ✅ 说:Qwen3-TTS ✅ 四个模型挤在 15G 显存里 一张消费级显卡,从一个开源项目开始,到一个能开直播的"虚拟主播"。 一个人,两个月。 我录了一段,你们自己感受下👇 我的 codex 还在帮我改 bug,人家的 AI 已经出去挣钱了😂
B站一兄弟做的赛博女友,太有感觉了! 纯本地运行的 AI 女友,不联网,不用 API key。 VAD:Silero VAD v5 STT:Whisper LLM:本地 llama.cpp TTS:Qwen3-TTS 四个模型全部塞进 15G 显存,且可自由热切换。 基于开源项目 speech-to-speech 改造。 我的codex啥时候能这样?😂
108
150
12
926
278,976
Cool eval. Simply ask an LLM “Land or Water?” and give it a latitude and longitude coordinate as text. Ask 16,200 times, plot as image. The models know. From compressing the internet.
Replying to @celestepoasts
results for all claudes
695
1,063
165
19,039
1,437,319
results for all claudes
80
246
102
3,572
1,330,702
Dusting off this tweet from April because this gap in shared understanding of LLM capability is *widening*. It's now less "two groups of people speaking past each other" and more a sharp funnel. - Napkin math somewhere around 6B people (~75% of the population) have barely come in contact with LLMs at all. - Around 1-2B (~20%) are casual and infrequent users of free-tier ChatGPT-like products. This group sees derpy chatbots and treats them a bit like a better Google search, a writing aid, or etc. Maybe an agent tries to book you a flight. I have non-tech friends who (reasonably, imo) say they have not much use for it at all. Even many professionals outside of math&code are in this tier. For example, execs and many other functions spend a lot of their time talking to other people, so while they understand what is happening intellectually, it is still second-hand and a bit abstract. - Now we get to professional use of frontier-grade LLMs in math&code. Somewhere around 20M people (0.2%) see first-hand that large, complex projects that used to take them weeks/months can now be completed by agents with a prompt. Building apps, copying apps, translating apps, decompiling apps from binaries... This has all happened very quickly and recently - less than 1 year ago, I was writing code manually by hand, typing memorized computer code commands into a code editor character by character, occasionally pressing Tab to autocomplete a little chunk of code. - And finally we get to the ~5,000 people (~0.00006%) with access to frontier-grade systems internally. The external world has seen the preview. It looks like swarms of thousands of agents collaborating over weeks on software mega projects: minting zero days, running cyber attacks and defenses at machine speeds, discovering new science, advancing the frontier of mathematics. Things that would have taken top professionals in the industry years of work. Meanwhile, human review and comprehension are starting to fall behind. For example, people are still involved in the "archeology" of the OpenAI-HF incident from many months ago. Mathematicians may be poring over the 722 manuscripts on frontier mathematics for a while. The funnel is driven by a combination of factors: 1. The impact scales with ambition, problem size, and horizon. A question with a paragraph answer barely stresses the system. You need a reservoir of big, difficult problems that you really care about. This aspect drives the consumer / professional dimension of the funnel. 2. The jaggedness of the system (which I have written about a lot separately). Capability peaks in domains that are digital, verifiable and economically valuable. This is because LLM capability emerges from reinforcement learning on verifiable rewards on a curated environment mixture driven by revenue potential. This aspect primarily drives the area (e.g. math&code) dimension of the funnel. 3. Access. Free-tier, paid-tier, internal. So this is the weirdness of the moment. The general public has mostly not interacted with these systems. When they have, it looks like a derpy chatbot. The majority of professionals still see only a modest uplift. And a small sliver of professionals are experiencing the vertigo of the curve going vertical. And it is all happening at the same time.
Judging by my tl there is a growing gap in understanding of AI capability. The first issue I think is around recency and tier of use. I think a lot of people tried the free tier of ChatGPT somewhere last year and allowed it to inform their views on AI a little too much. This is a group of reactions laughing at various quirks of the models, hallucinations, etc. Yes I also saw the viral videos of OpenAI's Advanced Voice mode fumbling simple queries like "should I drive or walk to the carwash". The thing is that these free and old/deprecated models don't reflect the capability in the latest round of state of the art agentic models of this year, especially OpenAI Codex and Claude Code. But that brings me to the second issue. Even if people paid $200/month to use the state of the art models, a lot of the capabilities are relatively "peaky" in highly technical areas. Typical queries around search, writing, advice, etc. are *not* the domain that has made the most noticeable and dramatic strides in capability. Partly, this is due to the technical details of reinforcement learning and its use of verifiable rewards. But partly, it's also because these use cases are not sufficiently prioritized by the companies in their hillclimbing because they don't lead to as much $$$ value. The goldmines are elsewhere, and the focus comes along. So that brings me to the second group of people, who *both* 1) pay for and use the state of the art frontier agentic models (OpenAI Codex / Claude Code) and 2) do so professionally in technical domains like programming, math and research. This group of people is subject to the highest amount of "AI Psychosis" because the recent improvements in these domains as of this year have been nothing short of staggering. When you hand a computer terminal to one of these models, you can now watch them melt programming problems that you'd normally expect to take days/weeks of work. It's this second group of people that assigns a much greater gravity to the capabilities, their slope, and various cyber-related repercussions. TLDR the people in these two groups are speaking past each other. It really is simultaneously the case that OpenAI's free and I think slightly orphaned (?) "Advanced Voice Mode" will fumble the dumbest questions in your Instagram's reels and *at the same time*, OpenAI's highest-tier and paid Codex model will go off for 1 hour to coherently restructure an entire code base, or find and exploit vulnerabilities in computer systems. This part really works and has made dramatic strides because 2 properties: 1) these domains offer explicit reward functions that are verifiable meaning they are easily amenable to reinforcement learning training (e.g. unit tests passed yes or no, in contrast to writing, which is much harder to explicitly judge), but also 2) they are a lot more valuable in b2b settings, meaning that the biggest fraction of the team is focused on improving them. So here we are.
2,097
5,824
2,223
43,436
6,634,119
pieck retweeted
丰田的老规矩:改善省出的人手,不能拿去裁 日本博主“黔騎士”发了一条推文 xitter.cf/blackright0/status/210… ,核心观点是:AI 一提效就裁员的公司,员工再也不会主动琢磨怎么用好 AI。 他拿丰田举例。丰田当年把“改善”(Kaizen,一线员工持续提小建议、优化流程的做法)推广到海外时,讲师反复强调一条铁律: “流程改善后工时减少了,也绝对不能因此裁人。” 因为如果提建议的结果是自己或同事丢了饭碗,现场就再也不会有人提建议。 他认为 AI 导入是同一个道理。效率一上去就砍人力成本,员工就会把用 AI 的好点子藏起来。 反过来,把省出的时间用来想更有意思的企划、多花时间陪客户、学新技能,现场才会越用越多。在他看来,能把公司文化往这个方向转的企业,才能在 AI 时代把一线的智慧收上来。
AI 提效之后,别急着把人裁掉 这一段关于丰田“持续改善”的讨论。 大意是,员工通过改进工作方式减少了工时,公司不应该立刻因此裁员。否则,下一次,一线员工就不会再主动告诉你,哪里还可以改进。 发帖的人把这个道理延伸到了 AI:如果员工每找到一种提效方法,得到的回应都是团队缩编,那么公司迟早会发现,大家依然在用 AI,却不再愿意分享自己是怎么用的。 那么问题来了: 如果改进工作的结果,是让改进者承担失业风险,我们凭什么期待他们持续贡献自己的经验和创造力? AI 能不能提高效率,是技术问题。提高效率之后,员工愿不愿意继续和公司合作,则取决于另一套规则。 丰田在介绍其生产方式时,明确把“让员工的工作更容易”作为前提,并强调全体员工在日常工作中持续进行小步改善。这里的改善,既追求效率,也指向工作本身的改进。 企业要消除的是浪费,而不应该让消除浪费的人觉得,自己才是那个被消除的对象。 设想一个软件团队。 某位开发者花了不少时间,把一类原本需要三天完成的工作,改造成半天就能跑完的 AI 工作流。他整理了上下文,补充了测试,记录了常见错误,也愿意把方法分享给其他人。 管理者可以说:这套方法值得推广,你来带着团队继续完善,我们也终于有机会处理那些长期积压的问题。 管理者也可以说:既然这部分工作不需要那么多人了,我们重新评估一下团队编制。 第二种回应未必会让员工停止使用 AI,却可能让他们停止公开自己的真实效率。 自己用,但不说节省了多少时间;按时交付,但不主动分享整套方法;愿意提升个人能力,却不愿意再帮助公司拆解哪些岗位可以被替代。 在这种情境里,把员工简单归类为“思想保守”“抵制变革”,恐怕没有抓住问题。 他不是看不到技术的价值。恰恰相反,他看得很清楚,也在认真计算这份价值最终会落到谁的手里。 DORA 关于生成式 AI 与软件开发的研究也提供了一个相关观察:采取措施回应员工就业顾虑的组织,其团队 AI 采用程度更高。这是关联性发现,不能推出“不裁员就一定转型成功”,但至少提醒我们,就业预期并不是技术推广之外的题外话。 因此,企业在讨论 AI 使用率时,应该把两个问题分开。 一个是,员工有没有使用 AI。 另一个是,员工愿不愿意把自己摸索出来的方法,变成整个组织都能使用的能力。 买账号、办培训,可以帮助解决前一个问题。后一个问题,需要员工相信分享是值得的。 当一个人帮助公司减少了对自己的依赖,公司准备怎样评价他的贡献? 如果答案只是“既然不再依赖你,你就不重要了”,那么公司实际上是在鼓励员工保留那些只有自己才能处理的环节。 相反,越愿意消除个人依赖、把经验变成公共能力的人,越应该获得相应的认可和机会。 这不是要求公司永久保留某个岗位,而是要承认:让组织不必每次都依赖自己,是一种贡献,不是没有贡献的证明。 我一直在讨论一个变化:开发者的工作,可以从直接编写软件,转向为 Agent 构建软件生产线。 我把这样的角色称为 Builder。 在这个视角下,开发者的任务不只是让 AI 生成代码,还包括定义目标、组织上下文、设计约束、建立验证方式,以及让整个流程能够持续、可靠地运行。 这也意味着,评价开发者的方式需要跟着改变。 假设一个人搭建的工作流,让整个团队减少了重复操作和返工。他亲手写的代码可能变少了,但他对交付结果的贡献,未必变小。 如果公司仍然只通过代码量、任务数量、在线时长来判断价值,就可能出现一个荒谬的结果:一个人把工作方式改进得越好,越需要额外证明自己没有闲着。 更何况,某个环节提速,并不能直接推出团队可以按相同比例缩编。 代码生成快了,需求是否清楚、验证是否充分、上线是否可靠,仍然需要分别判断。2025 年 DORA 报告观察到,AI 采用与软件交付吞吐量改善存在正向关系,但与交付稳定性的关系仍然为负;报告强调,AI 的收益取决于它所处的工作系统,而不只是工具本身。 我的理解是,提效之后首先应该做的,是重新检查整个交付过程,看看瓶颈去了哪里,而不是只盯着原来的编码环节少用了多少时间。 比如在一条 Rust 软件生产线里,我会希望编译诊断、测试结果和运行反馈都能进入 Agent 的修正流程。但即便编译和测试通过,我也不会据此宣布业务需求已经全部满足。验收标准和证据覆盖到哪里,信任才能走到哪里。 这些工作需要有人设计,也需要有人维护。 当然,并不是给每个人换上 Builder 的头衔,就自动完成了转型。公司还要提供相应的时间、权限、培训和评价方式。 不能一边要求员工构建新的生产系统,一边仍然按照旧流水线上的忙碌程度给他们打分。 原帖提出,节省出来的时间应该用于“创造下一份价值”。 我赞同这个方向,但这句话同样需要警惕。 它不能变成另一种说法:既然 AI 已经帮你做完原来的工作,请你马上找到更大的价值,否则就证明你没有必要留下。 好的 AI 转型,应该让员工愿意淘汰低效的工作方式,而不是为了避免自己被淘汰,被迫保护低效。
79
70
41
523
94,258
pieck retweeted
软件正在变得像牛奶一样便宜!完全竞争的市场里,价格最后都会贴着成本走,AI 把写软件的成本压到接近零,软件也就成了日用品。以前推荐引擎让内容千人千面,现在连软件本身都能千人千面,你的软件只为你自己的目标而写,用完就丢,跟别人兼不兼容根本无所谓 👀 @turingou 说他的重心已经从造软件,转移到了想清楚软件到底要达成什么目的。所以接下来值钱的不再是软件,而是你想达成的目的,能绕开软件直接到达,就不需要软件了 — 来自 Indigo Talk EP52
13
9
1
49
7,690
曾经我们也有一个短暂的时期互联网上充斥着相似的社交网络应用
every major company is arriving at roughly the same offering: persistent memory, email/calendar/messages, browser + computer use, background tasks, proactive notifications, voice, app/tool execution, ambient context, & some notion of a personal agent sitting above everything. remarkable levels of convergence with very little differentiation whatsoever.
3
3
35
39,912
最近在回顾《权力的游戏》,但因为现在在日本没法订阅 HBO,所以我打开了 U-NEXT(我的 U-NEXT 订阅里其实有 HBO 的一部分影视资源)。 不过日本的正版网站只有日语字幕,所以我就想着,能不能让 ChatGPT 帮我把日本这些流媒体的非日语资源,全部做成中英文对照的字幕,然后覆盖在播放器上,GPT-6.1 SOL 发布之后,正好我试试看,结果它几分钟就做出来如图3的效果。 所以,如果你在学一门新的语言(比如说日语或者法语),你也可以使用吹替版本,然后在字幕下面要求 Codex 去做假名注音,并且把不懂的词汇给你放到生词表里。 而且,这几乎适用于世界上任何视频和语音资源。我可以这么理解:AI 也许会改变所有流媒体的产品形态。我们也许会看到一种终极的播放器,它可以播放世界上任何的视频和音频,并且完全以你要求的语言(例如母语)来进行匹配,或者换句话说,电脑本身的用户界面会变成某种播放器,因为用户界面也是即时生成的,你可以把它理解为视频的一部分。 人机交互界面正在被混合成某种灰色的领域。
11
24
1
200
56,132
pieck retweeted
SPARE。由 可灵 Kling 4.0 满血版生成的短片。 感谢可灵 AI 的内测邀约。本片使用 可灵 Kling 4.0 满血版全能参考生成。 满血版比 Flash 还是强不少。 - 原生 30 秒直出 - 画面与声音更清晰 - 口型匹配更精准 - 21:9 电影画幅 可灵 Kling 4.0 将于 10 月上线。 中文字幕版:
94
88
46
752
267,957
哇,这效果已经几乎看不出来是 AI 了
SPARE。由 可灵 Kling 4.0 满血版生成的短片。 感谢可灵 AI 的内测邀约。本片使用 可灵 Kling 4.0 满血版全能参考生成。 满血版比 Flash 还是强不少。 - 原生 30 秒直出 - 画面与声音更清晰 - 口型匹配更精准 - 21:9 电影画幅 可灵 Kling 4.0 将于 10 月上线。 中文字幕版:
6
20
4
161
104,498
pieck retweeted
Every time I start focusing on early retirement, I get depressed. I hit my FIRE number to never work again back in January of this year. This was followed by one of the most soul-crushing depression feelings I have ever had in my life. I realized I had organized my entire life around achievement for survival. And once survival was taken care of, achievement started to not lift me up the same way it did for the last ten years. This caused me to uncover the most uncomfortable belief that many men in America feel, I equated my productivity with my worth. So every step towards early retirement was a step towards worthlessness. And wow, realizing the destination I was yearning for since I was 21 was actually a state of worthlessness shook my entire body. So, I decided to travel and see the world. I saw Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, India, Thailand, and Taiwan. I came back from my travels, and I was still depressed. Nothing had actually changed. My productivity and worth were still inextricably linked. So, is there a way to contribute while also being retired? Or do you just put your head in the sand and move back to San Francisco? 😂
159
12
10
294
116,857
对于财富的观念,美国有两种极端,第一种是觉得无论挣多少钱都无法轻易退休,缺乏生活的安全感,第二种是觉得退休后失去了人生最重要的意义,失去了价值。我有时候感受到,美国太大人却太少了,国土的广阔或多或少会带来精神的荒芜。
Every time I start focusing on early retirement, I get depressed. I hit my FIRE number to never work again back in January of this year. This was followed by one of the most soul-crushing depression feelings I have ever had in my life. I realized I had organized my entire life around achievement for survival. And once survival was taken care of, achievement started to not lift me up the same way it did for the last ten years. This caused me to uncover the most uncomfortable belief that many men in America feel, I equated my productivity with my worth. So every step towards early retirement was a step towards worthlessness. And wow, realizing the destination I was yearning for since I was 21 was actually a state of worthlessness shook my entire body. So, I decided to travel and see the world. I saw Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, India, Thailand, and Taiwan. I came back from my travels, and I was still depressed. Nothing had actually changed. My productivity and worth were still inextricably linked. So, is there a way to contribute while also being retired? Or do you just put your head in the sand and move back to San Francisco? 😂
7
8
2
143
52,926
We now have confirmation that Chat, Work, and Codex are going to be merged, and the team says they’re working hard to make the Chat experience better and more comfortable for everyone. My biggest question is what happens to usage limits. Right now, Plus users can basically use GPT-5.6 Sol in Chat almost endlessly. If everything gets merged into one experience, I really hope that freedom doesn’t disappear.
165
54
21
1,494
148,008
Vertical personal agents and account ownership I don't buy that there will be one general-purpose personal agent. I think there will be specific agents for: •productivity / work •food and grocery •money •health Each of these will be owned by whoever controls the system of record and the right to act. Take money. The money agent should be your bank account and execute transactions on your behalf. It has the ledger, the license, the fraud models, and the liability when something goes wrong. A general agent that "logs into" your bank is a screen scraper with ambition. The bank that becomes an agent is the agent. The same pattern repeats: •Food and grocery: Whoever owns the cart, the inventory, and the last mile. The agent knows what's in your fridge because it put it there. •Health: Whoever holds your records, your labs, and a relationship with a licensed provider. Advice without the chart is a guess. Action without a license is a lawsuit. •Productivity / work: Whoever owns your calendar, inbox, and docs. Context is the moat, and it already lives somewhere. Agents win on three things: data, permission, and accountability. A horizontal agent can borrow the first, beg for the second, and has none of the third. Trust isn't general either. I'll let an agent book my dinner without asking. I won't let the same agent wire $50K or change my medication. Each domain has its own risk tolerance, its own regulation, and its own definition of "done." One agent can't hold all of those thresholds at once. The general-purpose agent doesn't disappear. It becomes the router. It's the front desk that knows which specialist to call. That's a real product, but it's thin. Routers commoditize, and the specialists capture the value. The question isn't "who builds the best assistant?" It's "who owns the account the assistant acts on?" The incumbents with licenses and ledgers have a bigger head start than they realize. The startups that win will either become the system of record in a vertical or make themselves impossible to route around. The future isn't one agent that does everything. It's a handful of agents that each own something.
102
29
33
371
62,560
依附于通用代理的插件体系当中的垂直化 agent,就是未来的软件
Vertical personal agents and account ownership I don't buy that there will be one general-purpose personal agent. I think there will be specific agents for: •productivity / work •food and grocery •money •health Each of these will be owned by whoever controls the system of record and the right to act. Take money. The money agent should be your bank account and execute transactions on your behalf. It has the ledger, the license, the fraud models, and the liability when something goes wrong. A general agent that "logs into" your bank is a screen scraper with ambition. The bank that becomes an agent is the agent. The same pattern repeats: •Food and grocery: Whoever owns the cart, the inventory, and the last mile. The agent knows what's in your fridge because it put it there. •Health: Whoever holds your records, your labs, and a relationship with a licensed provider. Advice without the chart is a guess. Action without a license is a lawsuit. •Productivity / work: Whoever owns your calendar, inbox, and docs. Context is the moat, and it already lives somewhere. Agents win on three things: data, permission, and accountability. A horizontal agent can borrow the first, beg for the second, and has none of the third. Trust isn't general either. I'll let an agent book my dinner without asking. I won't let the same agent wire $50K or change my medication. Each domain has its own risk tolerance, its own regulation, and its own definition of "done." One agent can't hold all of those thresholds at once. The general-purpose agent doesn't disappear. It becomes the router. It's the front desk that knows which specialist to call. That's a real product, but it's thin. Routers commoditize, and the specialists capture the value. The question isn't "who builds the best assistant?" It's "who owns the account the assistant acts on?" The incumbents with licenses and ledgers have a bigger head start than they realize. The startups that win will either become the system of record in a vertical or make themselves impossible to route around. The future isn't one agent that does everything. It's a handful of agents that each own something.
7
2
2
58
18,890
Grok 帮我自动读书签,并且分发给我的软件开发工作站,真的很有意义。 以前想要完成类似的功能,必须得自己实现,通过服务器上的 MCP 来连接 Twitter,然后授权自己的开发者账户。或者绕一大圈,通过电脑操作来完成。当然,这只是把一件事情变得简单许多,但我从后边看到了一种潜在的 agent 协作景象,这就是垂直化的专业 agent。 Grokbot 其实在模型选择上,一开始的策略是主打 Grok 的模型,但现在已经开始对所有优秀的 SOTA 模型和低成本模型开放。实际上,它变成了有着 personal agent 外表、类似于 OpenRouter 这样的 harness 路由器。 但它拥有基于 X 的专业背景知识。这就让它在这个领域(也就是文字化的社交网络,尤其是现在 X 几乎是所有 AI 产品发布的最重要平台的前提下),成为了一个非常具有专业性的垂直化个人代理。 也许在两三年之内,我们可以看到传统的软件(即便是移动端软件)的主要界面,也会从复杂的 UI 变成类似于 Grokbot 这样的垂直化 Personal Agent。 然后,我们会操作这些真正无可替代的、具有专业背景知识的 Agent,在它们内部来进行互相通信和协作。我想,这就是移动端软件和传统软件的未来。
3
8
5
133
24,765
tailscale 是最适合做多 agents/personal agents 通信与控制平面的产品,而且我有预感他们已经在做了
8
7
1
124
34,589
软件分发(销售)的确已经没有意义了,所有软件本质上都成为了开源软件。已经存在的专业软件被代替只是时间问题,这迫切让我思考软件到底还能以什么方式存续并盈利。
41
40
21
506
92,421