Comment by elicash

Comment by elicash 6 hours ago

4 replies

Here's Simon Willison's take:

“Most of it is complete slop,” he said in an interview. “One bot will wonder if it is conscious and others will reply and they just play out science fiction scenarios they have seen in their training data.”

I found this by going to his blog. It's the top post. No need to put words in his mouth.

He did find it super "interesting" and "entertaining," but that's different than the "most insane and mindblowing thing in the history of tech happenings."

Edit: And here's Karpathy's take: "TLDR sure maybe I am "overhyping" what you see today, but I am not overhyping large networks of autonomous LLM agents in principle, that I'm pretty sure."

saberience 6 hours ago

<delete this comment>

I was being too curmudgeonly. ^_^

  • elicash 6 hours ago

    I think you are a bit too caught up in tweets.

    People can be more or less excited about a particular piece of tech than you are and it doesn't mean their brains are turned off.

    • saberience 5 hours ago

      This is what Karpathy said:

      “ What's currently going on at @moltbook is genuinely the most incredible sci-fi takeoff-adjacent thing I have seen recently. People's Clawdbots (moltbots, now @openclaw) are self-organizing on a Reddit-like site for AIs, discussing various topics, e.g. even how to speak privately.”

      Which imo is a totally insane take. They are not self organizing or autonomous, they are prompted in a loop and also, most of the comments and posts are by humans, inciting the responses!

      And all of the most viral posts (eg anti human) are the ones written by humans.

      • charcircuit 5 hours ago

        The fact that these are agents of actual people who have communicated their goals is what makes this interesting. Without that you get essentially subreddit simulator.

        If you dismiss it because they are human prompted, you are missing the point.