跳到正文

#现象/趋势

今日 0 条
10月15日周四
  1. “哇,这个 Muse 设备真酷……太有感觉了...” “我的 AI 智能体不活在聊天窗口里。她住在我的工作室墙上 🌅 Pi 5 + 激光投影仪 + 无屏幕、无应用——只有她,漂浮在墙上,随着工作状态改变。” “我们大声说话——她倾听,并以她自己的声音回答。” “@alexandr_wang @natfriedman ——你们的 @muse SDK 已经从设备中逃脱,搬了进来! 仍在进行中——新的感官即将到来...”

    引用psathakis.eth@zatadigitall

    My AI agent doesn't live in a chat window. She lives on my studio wall 🌅 Pi 5 + laser projector + No screen, no app — just her, floating on the wall, changing state as she works. We talk out loud — she listens, and answers back in her own voice. @alexandr_wang @natfriedman — your @muse SDK escaped the gadget and moved in! Still a work in progress — new senses coming..

    Alexandr Wang观点大佬观点现象/趋势评分 17
  2. "AI 助手操作国民级 App 体验不佳,用户更倾向于自行操作;智能助手需先优化自身生态体验;重做对 AI 友好的双边网络或为解决之道。"

    引用sleepy@sleepy0x13

    我觉得豆包手机就是未来手机应该有的样子。只可惜,这是中国互联网永远等不来的未来。 今天看到豆包手机助手公布的最新名单,153 款 App 明确拒绝 AI Agent 进行屏幕自动化操作。微信、QQ、淘宝、支付宝、美团、拼多多、小红书,甚至 DeepSeek 和 Kimi 都在里面。 我其实一直挺看好豆包手机的。过去十几年,智能手机的发展几乎都是围绕 App 展开的,我们每天花大量时间在不同 App 之间切换,自己搜索、比较、点击、填写信息。现在终于有了一种新的交互方式,你只需要告诉手机想做什么,剩下的交给 AI。 我觉得这才是 AI 时代手机应该发生的变化。 但问题也恰恰出在这里。 如果 AI 可以替用户点外卖、订机票、买东西,用户就不再需要反复打开那些 App,更不会按照平台设计好的路径去浏览商品、观看广告、接受推荐。 对于用户来说,这当然是好事。但对于那些花了十几年、几百亿才建立起流量入口的互联网巨头来说,这简直是在动它们的命根子。 过去这么多年,中国互联网最擅长的事情之一,就是把用户困在自己的生态里。链接不能随便跳,数据不能随便拿,服务也很难跨平台调用。每家公司都想成为用户的唯一入口。 现在 AI 终于有机会把这些割裂的服务重新连接起来了,结果大家又开始关门。 更有意思的是,几乎所有这些公司都在大谈 Agent,都在宣传 AI 将如何改变未来。 我相信豆包手机代表的交互方式迟早会成为主流,也相信技术问题会一个个解决。但技术进步从来不意味着既得利益者会主动让路。 中国互联网什么都不缺,模型、工程师、产品能力、庞大的用户市场,我们都有。 唯独缺一个愿意让别人进来的互联网。 我们可能比任何时候都更接近下一代手机,却依然被困在上一代互联网里。

    Bojie Li观点现象/趋势大佬观点评分 40
  3. "AI对员工效率提升仅50%,少数员工能实现10x、100x效率提升。制造业约束难以转化为技能,模型持续学习能力有限,构建RL环境困难。AI在数学、理论、网络安全等领域表现优异,但在现实交互中存在鸿沟。"

    引用François Chollet@fchollet

    String theory is what happens when an intelligent system is starved of sensory input and starts hallucinating. Intelligence needs grounding. For this reason, intelligence is practically never the bottleneck to solving impactful problems. The bottleneck is iterated contact with reality.

    Bojie Li观点大佬观点现象/趋势评分 40
  4. Claire Vo 对 Muse Wonder 和 Muse Wonder Full 进行了深入评测,探讨了其在智能体任务处理上的表现和设计上的不足。她表示,尽管对处理智能体任务的能力印象深刻,但对设计方面的表现不太满意,是否每天都会使用还有待观察。完整评测视频可在 YouTube 上观看。

    引用claire vo 🖤@clairevo

    LIVE: The full How I AI bench on Muse Wonder (and Wonder Full) - the new frontier model by @AIatMeta I really loved how it handled agentic tasks, really hated what it designed. Still TBD: will I reach for it every day? Full ep on YT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dChiPsd0uF4

    Alexandr Wang观点大佬观点评测/基准评分 20
10月14日周三
  1. Meta高管Finkd和Wang讨论了Muse Wonder及其前沿模型构建,并展望了AI未来。

    引用John Collison@collision

    Cheeky Pint is back! Mark Zuckerberg @finkd and Alexandr Wang @alexandr_wang came to the pub to discuss their new frontier model, Muse Wonder. 00:00:24 Muse’s breakout use cases 00:07:28 The model is the product 00:14:35 Muse Wonder 00:24:56 How frontier models are built 00:48:26 Betting $100B 01:07:21 Agentic commerce 01:19:34 OpenRouter 01:20:06 Beyond the smartphone 01:27:00 Funding 01:34:06 Why AI won’t be winner-take-all 01:40:46 Meta Superintelligence Labs (MSL) 02:08:11 Working for Mark Zuckerberg

    AI at Meta观点大佬观点行业动态评分 30
  2. "2021年,盘古大模型发布,标志着大模型价值被认可,推动UB项目升级为公司战略。至2025年,Ascend 950量产,实现当年协议和设想。LLM多数技术已有前沿研究员预研,但agent领域深入程度尚不及网络。"

    引用月球大叔@uncle_moon_x

    这个Anthropic披露的文件是真的吗? 2021年7月 - 讨论1T模型的训练和RL - 讨论硬件的风险,TPU,Trainium - 讨论language,code,diffs,PRs,等数据集的构造 - 讨论各种各样的coding工具 - 讨论各种scaling law,reward model,test time compute,long context,memory - 讨论RL for tool use??? 每一个单词现在看完全不吃惊,但在当时2021,同时出现在一个文档,让我再次惊叹,人的认知差距可以跨这么多年吗 https://i.smitop.com/concise-research-roadmap.pdf

    Bojie Li观点大佬观点模型发布评分 37
10月13日周二
  1. DeepSeek 刘胜宇认为LLM产业化中,机器成本超过人力成本,工程经验比原始智能更重要。财务自由不能带来创造自由,进入新领域需深入学习、取得成果或具备整合资源的能力。

    引用Andrej Karpathy@karpathy

    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.

    Bojie Li观点大佬观点现象/趋势评分 25
10月12日周一
  1. 研究者应考虑公开分享自己的RL环境,以促进整个领域的发展。尽管美国前沿实验室分享面临困难,但相信这将对领域和世界产生巨大影响!开源社区会将研究成果迅速转化为可用训练环境。

    引用Naveen@NaveenKumar__T

    This is how open source should work. A closed lab publishes research, and within days the community turns it into training environments anyone can use. Early and rough, as Clem says, but the direction is lovely. #OpenSource #AI

    clem 🤗观点开源/仓库大佬观点评分 5
  2. "约75%的人未曾接触LLM,20%的人偶尔使用ChatGPT等免费产品,0.2%的人使用前沿LLM进行复杂项目,0.00006%的人内部访问前沿系统,认知差距因问题规模、领域和技术细节等因素扩大。"

    引用Andrej Karpathy@karpathy

    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.

    Andrej Karpathy观点大佬观点现象/趋势评分 45
10月11日周日
  1. > 我的主要目标是让用户感觉这很神奇。就像这不应该可能一样。 有了Jev,这成为可能!✨ @RileyRalmuto(仅供理解上下文): 自从发了这条推文,你还没准备好我为此应用准备的东西。太棒了,Opus 5.5正在改变我的生活,伙计。 环境智能,通过@typesafeai的Jev作为你的智能体的触手。这意味着你的智能体始终与你同在,看到你所看到的,通过Jev使用你的电脑,通过Haiku在屏幕上写和口述文本(这样又快又便宜),并作为你的智能体进行推理/行动。对我来说,这意味着通过CC的Opus 5.5。 结果证明,当你正在构建某物,并告诉Claude“我的主要目标是让用户感觉这很神奇。就像这不应该可能一样”……它就奏效了。😅

    引用Riley Coyote@RileyRalmuto

    you are *not* ready for what i've concocted for this app since posting this. hot damn Opus 5.5 is changing my life, dude. ambient intelligence, with @typesafeai's Jev as your agent's tendrils. meaning: your agent is always with you, sees what you see, uses your computer through Jev, writes and dictates text on screen through Haiku (so it's fast and cheap), and reasons // acts as your agent. for me that means Opus 5.5 via CC. turns out when you are building something and tell claude "my primary goal is for this to feel magical for the user. like it shouldn't be possible"...it works. 😅

    TypeSafe AI产品产品更新教程/实践评分 32
10月10日周六
  1. RSI 的定义是什么?AI 公司如 Google、Anthropic 和 OpenAI 在 RSI 方面的进展情况。

    引用imjustnewatai@imjustnewatai

    Some rumors I've heard. I'll start with Google, then Anthropic and OpenAI. Google: Insiders say Google has either cracked RSI (recursive self-improvement) or is very close. Their pace has picked up fast in recent months. They went from GPT-5 level to Opus 5.5 level in months, and speculation is that RSI made that possible. Anthropic: About a week ago, Anthropic started a new pretraining run. It is not Fable 5.5 but what would become Fable 6, or something bigger, to catch up to OpenAI's Bel. OpenAI: Bel (it may have another codename) is the model behind the math results OpenAI published a few days ago, and RSI apparently helped there too. From what I'm hearing, OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google are all very close to cracking RSI or already have. It will get scary and exciting at the same time.

    Bojie Li模型现象/趋势Agent评分 55
10月9日周五
  1. 爱这栋公共建筑! 我们不知道Microduck的电池能持续多久。 我们的Radxa原型在热管理上存在问题:仅20分钟后就开始降频,随后过热关闭。 我们用新的定制板解决了这个问题。为了测试它,我们让Microduck在一个专用区域内自主漫游,走来走去,站立和坐着,直到电池耗尽。 结果比我们希望的还要好: - 在2600mAh电池上超过3小时。 - 估计平均电池电流从约1.13A降至约0.82A,大约降低了28%。 - 峰值CPU温度从114°C降至60°C,在整个测试过程中没有热降频。 这次,电池耗尽之前冷却还没有完成呢! 对进度非常满意!

    引用Matthieu Lapeyre@matth_lapeyre

    We did not know how long Microduck would actually last on battery We had thermal management issues with our Radxa prototypes: throttling after just 20 minutes, followed by an overheating shutdown. We addressed this with the new custom board. To test it, we let Microduck roam autonomously in a dedicated area, walking around, standing and sitting until the battery ran out. The results are way better than we hoped :) - Over 3 hours on a 2600 mAh battery. - Estimated average battery current dropped from ~1.13 A to ~0.82 A, roughly 28% less. - Peak CPU temperature dropped from 114°C to 60°C, with zero thermal throttling throughout the test. This time, the battery ran out before the cooling did :) Very happy with the progress!

    clem 🤗产品产品更新开源/仓库评分 22
  2. GPT-6 在洗碗基准测试中取得最佳结果,解决流体运动方程问题,用时 88 小时。

    引用Joma Tech@jomatech

    Introducing ChatGPT for Dishwashing GPT-6 achieves state-of-the-art results on dishwashing benchmarks for long-running jobs and difficult stains. The Navier–Stokes Millennium Prize Problem is a $1 million challenge about whether the equations describing fluid motion can break down. In this video, I accidentally found a counter-example while trying to optimize my dishwasher. But in reality, OpenAI used 10,000 AI agents to find a proof in 88 hours: https://openai.com/index/navier-stokes-solution/ Parody of the original GPT-6 Astra ad @OpenAI #ChatGPT_Partner #chatgpt Credits: Written and Directed by Joma Co-Writer - Henry Connor Coan IV @coan_henry Production by Dauntlus Studios @dauntlus.studios Producer/Co-Director - Marcus Liew @dauntlus Camera Operator - Amos Lee @amoselijahlee Art Director - Alethea Soo @aletheasoo Art Assistant - Alicia Lim @aliciatkl_ Assistant Editor - GPT-6 Astra Music: Tensions Run High by Soundridemusic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ly9H63SLJJo

    OpenAI Developers模型模型发布评测/基准评分 17
10月8日周四
10月7日周三