What Would Make an AI Assistant Worth Paying For?
发布时间 来源
Episode 设置
在一期A16Z节目中，主持人与“Assistant Bench”基准测试的作者大卫·保林（David Paulin）热烈讨论了个人代理和消费者AI的快速发展。他们指出AI演变中的几个关键时刻，始于ChatGPT的对话能力，随后是编码代理，最近则是Instinct、Muse和ChatGPT Voice等个人代理的爆发式增长。
保林强调了他的“Assistant Bench”——一个面向消费者的基准测试，它根据单次提示在16个维度上比较了122种不同的AI助手。他的网站在播客发布前16天上线，已吸引了超过10万访客，表明该领域引起了广泛的好奇心。他将代理分为B2C通用代理（如Instinct、Muse、Caddy、Ollie、Season）和B2B工作流助手（如Town、Catch、Vellum）。
讨论随后转向了消费者动机，保林同意本·汤普森（Ben Thompson）的观点，即大多数消费者优先考虑花时间而非节省时间。然而，他认为金融领域，尽管是不常发生但价值高的行为，可能成为代理的关键应用领域，因为它涉及行政管理开销以及通过节约成本行动实现“免费的钱”的潜力。例如，使用代理进行HSA报销、机票降价退款，甚至智能家居自动化，如将洒水器连接到天气预报以减少50%的水费。保林认为，这些主动的、节约成本的代理的“隐形”本质对大规模采用至关重要。
对话探讨了用户与代理的互动方式，对比了iMessage集成和独立应用程序。虽然有些人喜欢iMessage的个人化感受，但另一些人，比如保林的妻子，则更喜欢视觉应用界面。最近发布的Muse配件引发了保林的“犀利观点”：他认为这不关乎赢得硬件竞争，更多是Meta收集真实世界数据以驱动扎克伯格（Zuckerberg）的元宇宙，利用其摄像头和多个麦克风作为环境感知、全天候的伴侣。然而，主持人则思考Meta的仅限音频的眼镜是否会成为“黑马产品”，在不引起社交尴尬的情况下提供连接性。
保林分享了他在骑自行车通勤时使用ChatGPT Voice的“神奇时刻”，他通过语音指令免提地对邮件进行分类、发送邀请和回复，从而实现了“零收件箱”。这强调了用户在忙碌时代理的实用性。
关于社交互动，他们承认将代理整合到群聊中而不具侵入性是一个挑战。虽然有些代理作为传统聊天参与者加入，但Instinct使用“代理网络”进行幕后沟通。沙恩·麦克（Shane Mack）的“Doc”提出了一种新方法，其中一个沉默的代理会倾听、记录笔记，并独立向个人发送行动事项提醒，从而防止群聊中断。他们一致认为模型在“应对技巧”方面的进展已停滞不前，使得社交贡献变得棘手，并建议代理在完成目录整理等实用性任务时更具增益作用。
发言者们讨论了市场是会根据代理的个性（例如，俏皮型 vs. 谨慎型）进行细分，还是根据其“内在特性”（例如，高度冒失型 vs. 高度谨慎型）进行细分。保林认为，由于可配置性，个性并不是一个强大的护城河，但“主动性”是一个巨大的差异化因素。他们提醒，代理必须走一条“非常微妙的界限”：虽然起草邮件或获取航班积分等主动行动受到欢迎，但直接影响用户（例如更换保险）的决策需要获得许可才能维持信任。主持人开玩笑地预测代理会和伴侣分手，突显了过度冒失的风险。
展望未来，保林建议消费者代理将越来越趋向于主动性和高度专业化，与主持人关于“垂直型初创公司”的论点相符——为小型、特定用户群体构建有价值的软件。他们还讨论了“助手”（执行指令性任务）与“代理”（拥有自主发起行动的能力）之间的区别。
播客随后展望了一个未来，代理将深刻影响人类，自动化繁琐任务，为家人和朋友腾出时间，从而形成一个“以消费者为中心的互联网”。他们探索了代理间的互动，预见到商业和服务的新范式。亚马逊阻止Muse而Shopify接纳它的例子说明了这种转变：亚马逊担心代理驱动的购买会导致去中介化和广告收入损失，而Shopify则将代理视为为个体卖家实现商业民主化。他们还设想代理如何可能扰乱餐厅预订等供应受限市场，可能导致基于忠诚度的访问或竞价战。
最后，他们讨论了经济方面，指出观察到的122个代理中有65个是付费的。这与Muse和Instinct等占主导地位的免费产品形成对比，对长尾初创公司构成了挑战。他们希望浏览器使用成本的下降能让更多产品免费，但也对消费者愿意支付高额费用的高价值代理表示了兴趣，表明这是一种“可能性拓展”而非单纯的成本降低。
In a recent episode of the A16Z Show, the host and David Paulin, author of the "Assistant Bench" benchmark, enthusiastically discussed the rapid advancements in personal agents and consumer AI. They noted several pivotal moments in AI's evolution, starting with ChatGPT's conversational capabilities, followed by coding agents, and most recently, the explosion of personal agents like Instinct, Muse, and ChatGPT Voice.
Paulin highlighted his "Assistant Bench," a consumer-facing benchmark comparing 122 different AI assistants across 16 dimensions based on single-shot prompts. His site, launched 16 days prior to the podcast, had already garnered over 100,000 visitors, indicating widespread curiosity in the space. He categorized agents into B2C generalized agents (like Instinct, Muse, Caddy, Ollie, Season) and B2B workflow assistants (like Town, Catch, Vellum).
Discussion then turned to consumer motivations, with Paulin agreeing with Ben Thompson's sentiment that most consumers prioritize spending time over saving it. However, he argued that finance, despite being an infrequent high-value behavior, could be a key area for agents due to its administrative overhead and potential for "free money" through cost-saving actions. Examples included using agents for HSA reimbursements, flight price drop refunds, or even smart home automation like connecting sprinklers to weather for 50% water bill reduction. Paulin believes the "invisible" nature of these proactive, cost-saving agents will be crucial for mass adoption.
The conversation explored how users interact with agents, contrasting iMessage integration with separate applications. While some prefer the personal feel of iMessage, others, like Paulin's wife, prefer visual app interfaces. The recent release of the Muse charm sparked a "hot take" from Paulin: he believes it's less about winning the hardware game and more about Meta collecting real-world data to fuel Zuckerberg's metaverse, leveraging its camera and multiple microphones as an ambient, 24/7 companion. The host, however, pondered if Meta's audio-only glasses might be a "sleeper hit," offering connectivity without social awkwardness.
Paulin shared a "magic moment" with ChatGPT Voice during his bike commute, where he achieved "inbox zero" by categorizing emails, sending invites, and replying, all through voice commands while hands-free. This underscored the utility of agents when users are occupied.
Regarding social interactions, they acknowledged the challenge of integrating agents into group chats without being intrusive. While some agents join as traditional chat participants, Instinct uses an "agent network" for behind-the-scenes communication. A new approach by Shane Mack's "Doc" was noted, where a silent agent listens, takes notes, and independently pings individuals for action items, preventing group chat disruption. They agreed that models' progress on "bedside manner" has plateaued, making social contributions tricky, and suggested agents are more additive when fulfilling utilitarian tasks like cataloging collections.
The speakers debated whether the market segments by agent personality (e.g., sassy vs. cautious) or by "constitution" (e.g., highly presumptuous vs. highly cautious). Paulin argued personality isn't a strong moat due to configurability, but "proactivity" is a massive differentiator. They cautioned about the "very fine line" agents must walk: while proactive actions like drafting emails or securing flight credits are welcomed, decisions impacting users directly (like switching insurance) require permission to maintain trust. The host jokingly anticipated agents breaking up with partners, highlighting the risks of over-presumptuousness.
Looking ahead, Paulin suggested consumer agents would increasingly move towards proactivity and hyper-specialization, aligning with the host's "narrow startups" thesis – building valuable software for small, specific user groups. They also discussed the distinction between "assistant" (performing directed tasks) and "agent" (possessing agency to initiate actions).
The podcast then envisioned a future where agents profoundly impact humanity, automating mundane tasks to free up time for family and friends, leading to a "consumer-aligned internet." They explored agent-to-agent interactions, foreseeing a new paradigm for commerce and services. The example of Amazon blocking Muse while Shopify embraced it illustrated the shift: Amazon fears disintermediation and loss of ad revenue from agent-driven purchases, while Shopify sees agents as democratizing commerce for individual sellers. They also mused about how agents might disrupt supply-constrained markets like restaurant reservations, potentially leading to loyalty-based access or bidding wars.
Finally, they addressed the economics, noting that 65 out of 122 observed agents were paid. This contrasts with dominant, free players like Muse and Instinct, posing a challenge for long-tail startups. They hoped that falling browser use costs could make more products free, but also expressed interest in high-value agents that consumers would be willing to pay significant sums for, indicating "possibility expansion" rather than mere cost reduction.
摘要
a16z General Partner Anish Acharya sits down with Assistant Benchmark creator David Pawlan to unpack the sudden explosion of personal AI agents and what it will take for one to become part of everyday life.
David has been testing dozens of assistants across real-world tasks, from managing email and booking travel to handling financial admin. They discuss why the most useful agents may become increasingly invisible, proactively checking you into flights, finding refunds, filing reimbursements, or simply handling the small tasks that pile up across everyday life.
They also explore whether the winning interface is an app, text thread, voice, or wearable; how much autonomy consumers will actually give their agents; and what happens when agents start interacting with other agents. From commerce and restaurant reservations to entirely new agent-native services, Anish and David ask what the internet looks like when software starts acting on our behalf.
Timestamps:
00:00 - Intro
00:54 - Poke, Instinct, Muse and the agent boom
03:41 - What Assistant Bench actually tests
09:14 - Cost savers beat time savers
14:53 - Muse charm as Meta's data play
20:03 - Silent agents in group chats
26:01 - Proactivity is the real moat
32:21 - Assistant vs agent, defined
40:22 - Amazon blocks Muse, Shopify opens the door
47:35 - The $20/day agent economics
Resources:
Follow David Pawlan on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-pawlan/
Follow Anish Acharya on X: https://x.com/illscience
Stay Updated:
If you enjoyed this episode, be sure to like, subscribe, and share with your friends!
Find a16z on X: https://twitter.com/a16z
Find a16z on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/a16z
Listen to the a16z Show on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/5bC65RDvs3oxnLyqqvkUYX
Listen to the a16z Show on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/a16z-podcast/id842818711
Follow our host: https://x.com/eriktorenberg
Please note that the content here is for informational purposes only; should NOT be taken as legal, business, tax, or investment advice or be used to evaluate any investment or security; and is not directed at any investors or potential investors in any a16z fund. a16z and its affiliates may maintain investments in the companies discussed. For more details please see http://a16z.com/disclosures.
GPT-4正在为你翻译摘要中......
中英文字稿 
普通大众并不在意效率提高10%。我有一个大胆的观点，这个名为Muse的魅力实际上并不是在硬件赛场上取胜，而是关于在现实世界中进行数据收集，以为扎克伯格未来的元宇宙进行实际世界的映射。我们内部开玩笑地说，好像已经到了有代理人给某人发信息：“我发现你对她不太感兴趣，所以我帮你分手了。”在主动性方面有非常强的防御性。我骑车去上班，想要完成任务，就开始和ChatGPT语音聊天。在30分钟的骑行过程中，我把邮件分类，提交到不同的标签，发送日历邀请，等到达办公桌时，收件箱已经清空。但这将是非常微妙的一条线，因为一旦越界，用户就会失去所有信任。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
The general population does not care about being 10% more efficient. I have a hot take thesis that this Muse charm is actually less about trying to win the hardware game, and it's more about data collection in the real world to fuel Zuckerberg's future metaverse of mapping out the actual world. We were joking internally, like we're days away from an agent messaging someone saying, I noticed you weren't that into her, so I went ahead and broke up with her. There is massive defensibility around proactivity. I was biking to work, I want to get stuff done, and I just start talking to ChatGPT Voice, and threw out my 30-minute bike ride to work, categorized my emails, submitted them to different labels, sent out calendar invites, got to the desk, inbox zero. But it will be a very fine line because if you cross that line once, you lose all trust with your user.
感觉上，未来会出现一些专门用于代理与代理之间互动的基础设施和产品，而这些在今天是不存在的。你怎么看？我们将不可避免地看到这种情况的出现。好的，欢迎收听A16Z节目。我很高兴能和我的朋友大卫·保林一起在这里。几周前我们聚过，我们对个人助理和消费者AI领域近期发生的一切都充满热情。最近几周真的发生了很多事情。也许可以这样开个头，我认为有一些时刻，这个生态系统的某些部分仿佛见到了“上帝”。ChatGPT就是其中之一，我想对很多人在2022年11月和2023年的一些时候来说，这是个巨大惊喜。它能写邮件、写诗，甚至能与人进行对话，让人感觉像是在和一个合成的“人”互动。当然，那就是一个开始，一个大爆炸。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
It does feel like there's going to be infrastructure and products that exist only for agent-to-agent interactions that doesn't exist today. What do you think? It is inevitable that we're going to see. All right, welcome to the A16Z Show. I'm so psyched to be here with my friend David Paulin. We hung a couple of weeks ago. We're both so enthusiastic about everything that's been happening with personal assistant and consumer AI generally, and man, so much has happened in the last couple of weeks. Maybe to tee it up, you know, I sort of think that there's been a few moments where some part of the, you know, ecosystem has sort of seen God. And ChatGPT was a big one, you know, I think for a lot of folks in November 22 and a bit of 23. It was like, what is this thing that can, you know, write emails and poems and, you know, start to have a conversation back and forth and feel like you're interacting with the synthetic person. That was, of course, the beginning, the big bang.
第二个重要时刻是关于编码代理和开发者一直痴迷于四元代码、编解码器以及轻松创建软件的能力的相关内容。最后，最近通过Instinct、Muse和ChatGPT的工作，我们见证了围绕个人代理及其能为消费者做些什么的极大热情。因此，我们在这里讨论所有与个人代理相关的话题。我们将尽可能深入探讨，并假设大家都见过我们所见过的许多事物。这将是我们对话系列的第一场。欢迎你，David。谢谢你。感谢邀请我来。我很高兴来到这里。让我们放眼全局，谈谈过去几个月、几周里个人代理的发展轨迹。你看到了什么？你对这些事物有怎样的看法？
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
The second moment really was coding agents and everything that developers have been obsessed with around sort of quad code and codecs and the ability to trivially create software. And then finally, most recently with Instinct, Muse, and ChatGPT work, we've had this extraordinary enthusiasm around personal agents and what they can do for us as consumers. So we're here to talk about all things personal agents. We're going to go as deep as we can. We're going to assume that everybody has seen many of the same things that we have seen. And we're going to make this a first in a series of conversations. Welcome, David. Thank you. Thanks for having me. Excited to be here. Let's like zoom out and maybe talk about, you know, the arc of personal agents over the last few months, the last few weeks. What have you been seeing? What's your sort of view on things?
是啊，在过去的四周里，这个领域发展得非常快。我们可以回顾一下。我是Polk的早期使用者。可以说Polk是首批真正投放市场的面向消费者的智能代理之一。它是在9月8日发布的，我是在9月11日，也就是三天后开始使用的。我对那段经历记忆犹新，因为那种体验真是无法相信。他们最大的噱头是和代理商谈判实际支付费用的过程，让我大开眼界。然后到了11月底，Open Claw发布，真正引起了轰动，预示着有重大的新事物出现。随后又有一些产品陆续推出，但最近Instinct在科技圈的Twitter上掀起了巨浪，话题爆棚。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah. So this space has exploded over the past four weeks. We can roll it back. I was an early adopter of Polk. So I want to say Polk, which was kind of one of the first like consumer agents to really hit the market. Yes. That launched, I believe it was September 8th. And then I started using it September 11th, like three days later. And like I remember it so vividly because it was just an unbelievable experience. Their whole gimmick was this, you know, negotiation with the agent on how much you're actually going to pay. And it totally blew my mind. Then comes late November and Open Claw gets released. And that kind of takes the actual world by storm of like, there is something coming. And then a few other have popped up here and there, but most recently we saw Instinct really blow up the tech Twitter bubble. Just absolutely wrote a wave, went nuts.
然后就像多米诺骨牌效应一样，有了GrokBot、Muse，还有很多小众的，比如Caddy、Ollie 或 Pally。看到整个科技泡沫正以惊人的兴趣和求知欲爆发，探索这些智能代理在日常生活中能为我们做些什么，真的很让人兴奋。我觉得大家都处于相同的境地，因为没人真正知道这些技术会如何发展。这就像狂野西部的时代，我们都是在摸索中前行。我完全同意。我们应该花点时间来讨论Assistant Bench，这是一个新的、非常重要且备受讨论的基准测试，你可能是它的作者之一。可以先简单介绍一下Assistant Bench，然后我会问你几个问题。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And then it was just dominoes, you have GrokBot, you have Muse, you have a bunch of long tail ones like Caddy or Ollie or Pally. And it's really been amazing to see, you know, this whole tech bubble is just exploding with interest and like an intellectual curiosity for what can these agents do for us on a day to day basis. And there's, uh, I think everyone's kind of in the same boat where nobody really knows. Like it's, it's the wild, wild west. We're just playing around here. I totally agree. And you, we should take a moment to talk about Assistant Bench, which is this new, you know, really important and discussed benchmark that you're the author of maybe tee, tee up Assistant Bench a little bit and then I'll ask you a few questions.
Assistant Benchmark 是一个网站，主要是从实际应用角度比较各种 AI 助手。我们会给这些助手提出相同的请求，比如“帮我预订一张去芝加哥的机票”或“在我所在位置五个街区以内找一家素食餐厅”等等。然后，我们会根据这些助手在单次请求中的实际表现进行比较。具体来说，我们会查看它们是否能完成任务、是否会询问后续问题、在 16 个不同指标上的表现如何等等。因此，尽管我们使用了“基准测试”这个词，但它更像是一个面向消费者的参考，而不是技术层面的对比。这个网站能帮助用户了解：如果我要订机票，我该用哪个助手？哪个助手表现最好？它们回复有多快？
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Assistant Benchmark is a site that essentially compares all of these AI assistants on a use case basis. So we're asking all of these assistants, the same prompt, book me a flight to Chicago, find me a vegetarian restaurant within five blocks of my specific location, et cetera, et cetera. And we're comparing the actual outcome on like on a one shot prompt. Does it actually work? Does it ask follow up questions? How does it perform across 16 different dimensions? And we compare those all. So it's, we use the word benchmark. Think of it more as like a consumer facing benchmark, not necessarily technical behind the scenes. But if I want to book a flight, which one should I actually use? Who is performing the best? How fast are they actually replying?
我开始进行这一系列比较，是因为我自己正在做市场研究，想弄清这些事物之间到底有什么区别？有哪些差距？然后我发布了一些研究结果。差不多是两周前的事了，今天正好是发布后的第16天。结果真是引起了轰动，网站访问量已经超过了10万次，访客数也超过了10万。几乎每个创始人都与我取得了联系。我认为这确实说明了大家的好奇心。人们在寻找答案，想知道这个行业的未来发展方向。所以，David，请你详细说说这是多么令人兴奋的事。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Got into this whole comparison because I was just doing market research myself, trying to figure out how are these things all comparing against one another? What are the gaps? And published a bit of that. And it was almost two weeks ago. It's 16 days ago today that we launched it. And it's just absolutely exploded. It's over 100,000 views on the website. The website has had over 100,000 visitors, had outreach from basically every single founder. And I think it really just goes to show like, everyone's curious. People, people are looking for, for answers to where this industry is, is moving. And so talk us through David. That's incredibly exciting.
翻译成中文如下：
现在，讨论中用基准来衡量事物已然成为常态，这很有趣，这一现象很酷。确实，如今有如此多的新品发布，尝试所有东西几乎是不可能的，但这也是一个令人兴奋的信号。也许我们可以聊聊那些不是本能（Instinct）和缪斯（Muse）的公司，我们稍后会深入讨论这两个。但你认为还有哪些公司正在做一些有趣的工作？你看到的专业化方向都有哪些呢？
当然，我们有许多末端解决方案。我认为可以将其分为两类：一类是面向消费者的B2C通用代理，例如本能或缪斯。还有一些更末端的，比如Caddy、Ollie和Season。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
It's cool to actually, it's funny how benchmarks have become such a staple now of the conversation. Yeah. So there's so many launches. It's hard to try everything, which is also an exciting signal. Maybe talk us through everybody who's not instinct and muse. We're definitely going to deep dive on those later. But who else do you think is doing interesting work? And what are the kind of directions of specialization that you're seeing? Totally. So we've got a bunch of long tail solutions out there. I think I would categorize it into two groups. You have like the B2C consumer facing generalized agents. That's like the instinct or muse. Some of the longer tail ones, you have caddy, you have ollie, you have season.
目前，我认为网站上有64个项属一般类别的。然后我们可以进一步细分到更专业的领域。比如说，你可以找到专注于旅行的选项，如soar或me；或者专注于电子邮件的选项。在另一个极端，则是更多用于B2B工作流程的助手，像是town, catch 和 vellum。这些助手本质上都在做同样的事情，它们都是你的助手，更像是执行助理，而不是面向消费者的助手。这就是目前的一般情况。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
There's, I believe, 64 right now, just in the general category on the site. And then we can break that down even further into a little more specialized within that. So you can have travel specific ones like soar or me. So you can have email specific ones. The other side of the spectrum is going to be more of like your B2B workflow type assistance. And those are, you know, anyone from the town to catch to vellum. And they're all essentially doing the same thing right there. They're your assistant. That's actually like more of like an executive assistant, not not the consumer facing approach to it. And that's kind of like the general landscape at the moment.
到目前为止，据我所知，各个类别总共有122种不同的情况。哇，真的太不可思议了。那么，关注的重点领域如何呢？现在，大家基本上都在关注通用和广泛的领域。是的，是的，就是想做所有的事情。拿旅游举个例子，这是一个不常发生但价值很高的行为。你认为这个类别会更像是连接到广泛领域的一个环节，还是认为它也有权成为一个通用的广泛领域代理呢？
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So far, to my knowledge, there are 122 different ones across all the categories. Wow. Incredible. And what about areas of concentration? Where is the most sort of interesting competitive focus? So everyone right now, by and large, is focusing on the general. Horizontal. Like, yeah, yeah, yeah, just trying to do trying to do everything. And when you think about something like travel, just to pick on that, that's an infrequent high value behavior. Do you think that that category ends up being organized more as a connector into the horizontal agent? Or do you think they have the right to win as a general horizontal agent as well?
我认为你可能会看到一个独立的赢家。但总体来说，我认为这更像是一个连接器。我现在大约有七八个不同的小组聊天，里面全是对助理话题感兴趣的人。现在这些群里已经有1200多人不停地聊天。旅游是第四大被讨论的应用场景，这很有趣，因为当你看趋势时，通常都是第一位讨论最多的，像是如果它帮我办理了登机手续，我可以订机票之类的。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
I think you're going to maybe see potentially one winner as an independent agent. But by and large, I really think it is going to be more of a connector. So I have like seven or eight different group chats now with just individuals obsessed with assistance talking. So there's now over 1200 people across all of the group chats just chatting over and over and over. Travel is the fourth most talked about use case, which is really interesting because when you look at like virality, it tends to be the number one that people are talking about if it checked into my flight for me, I was able to book my flight.
但如果你真的去观察人们每天的对话，你会发现他们真正用它做什么或者对什么最感兴趣。正如你所说，人们并不会每天都在旅行。所以这更像是一种噱头，对吧？它是为了吸引注意力。那么，实际的使用场景有哪几个呢？首先，一个常见的用途就是处理日常的行政事务，比如清理邮箱或者帮你填写表格，处理那些恼人的琐事。我认为这也涉及到这个领域未来的走向，我们可以稍后讨论一下谁将在这个领域取得胜利。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
But then you actually look at the day to day conversations of what people are really using it for and most curious about. To your point, people aren't traveling every day. So it's it's it's more of a gimmick, right? It's an attention grab. What are use cases one to three? So number one is more just daily admin type stuff, whether it's cleaning out your inbox, whether it's filing forms for you and the things that are really annoying. And I think that gets to the broader thesis of where I think the winner of this space will go that that we can touch on.
第二个方面是代理协调，这真的很有趣。我认为这些群聊有些偏见。第三个方面是开发专注。好吧，这些都是技术人员的群聊，所以不一定代表整个世界的情况。是的，但人们确实热衷于讨论代理协调，以及如何找到最有效的代理或者让你的代理如何相互沟通。开发代理。这现在如何转化为你手机上的编码世界，无论是使用文本组件的云代码，甚至更进一步，如果我是设计师，是否可以通过简单地发送消息给我的代理来对我的设计文件进行一些小的迭代更改呢？
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
The second is going to be more agent orchestration, which is really interesting. I think these group chats are a little biases. The third one is development focus. OK, these are all group chats of people in tech, right? So it's not necessarily representative of the world at large. Yeah, but people are talking a ton about agent orchestration and how do you find the most efficient agent or how your agents talk to each other? Development agents. How does this now translate to this coding world on your phone, whether it be, you know, using cloud code from a text component or even take it one step further of, OK, if I'm a designer, can I now make edits to my design files by just like texting my agent of like little small iteration changes?
好的。最后一个类别是金融。我觉得这个是最有趣的，因为在我看来，它是最不实用的。决策太多了。如果你能够让一个代理人为你赚十亿美元，那么所有对冲基金都会这样做。并不是每个人都能用自己的手机成功做到这一点。但这个话题最吸引人的是，你把一个强大的工具交到某人手里，他们首先想到的是，好的，你怎么帮我赚上一百万美元？
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah. And then the last category being finance. I think that's the most fun one to look into, because it is, in my opinion, the least practical. There's so many decisions. And if you could have an agent make a billion dollars for you, all the hedge funds would be doing it. It's not something that like everyone's going to succeed at with their own phone. But it is the most interesting that you give someone, an agent, a powerful tool right in their hands. And the first thing they think is, OK, how are you going to make me a million dollars? Yeah.
是的，这真的很有趣，因为有些评论家，比如 Ben Thompson 最近在 TBPN 上说，大多数消费者其实并不是在寻找提高生产力的方法，他们更倾向于花费时间，而不是节省时间，我对此表示赞同。不过，金融这个领域似乎是个例外，普通消费者在这方面面临大量的管理负担。如果你看看由消费者冷漠或缺乏信息而定义的金融市场或利润池，这里面有大量的利润本来可以返还给消费者，对吧？
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah. It's really interesting because one of the critiques, you know, Ben Thompson was on TBPN a few days ago talking about how most consumers aren't looking for productivity in their lives. They're looking to spend time, not save time, which I agree with. Yep. But it does feel like finance is an area in which it is, there is a ton of administrative overhead for the average consumer. And if you look at, you know, the number of financial markets or financial sort of profit pools that are defined by consumer apathy or being uninformed, that's a lot of profit dollars that could be delivered back to the consumer, right?
是的，我确实认为，尽管我基本同意本的观点，即大多数消费者寻找娱乐和打发时间，但美国消费者的生活中有一些重要的管理性方面，这些代理工具可以真正突破。我完全赞同。我认为这也接近我对赢家所在位置的总体看法。就像本提到的那样，我也同意。我觉得普通大众其实并不在意效率提升10%。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yep. I do think that the, you know, while I generally agree with Ben that most consumers are looking for entertainment and to spend time, I think there are sort of defining aspects of the U.S. consumer's life that are, you know, heavily administrative that these agents can really be a breakthrough for. Totally. And I think that that kind of touches on the general thesis to where I think the winners will sit. And that is that, like, to Ben's point, I agree. I think the general population does not care about being 10% more efficient.
是的。你雇助理的目的是让他们的工作做到无形，是吧？我最好的员工就是那些默默工作、高效完成任务的人。他们会更新你，告诉你他们做了些什么，然后你就会感叹，哇，太棒了！你雇人不是因为你喜欢管理他们。而且我看到的最好、最积极主动的例子都出现于金融领域。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah. You hire an assistant to allow it to be invisible, right? Like, the best employee I've ever had are the ones that are just doing their work, getting things done. They update you. Like, here's what I did. And you're like, wow, amazing. Like, you don't hire someone because you enjoy managing them. Yeah. And the best, most proactive use cases I'm seeing, I think, do fall in the finance category.
是的，我认为我们将看到在这样的世界中会有一次爆发，这个世界并不是由成本制造者来推动，而是由成本节约者来推动。因此，它将会是一些工作流程，比如我看到的一些很酷的用例：人们用它来整理过去一年的收据并申请 HSA 报销。噢，真不错。或者我自己常做的一个例子是，每当我预订航班时，如果机票价格下降，我就让我的助理联系航空公司为我获取旅游积分。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah. And I think we're going to see an explosion in a world, though, where it's not cost makers, it's cost savers. And so it's going to be workflows where, like, some cool use cases I saw, people are using it to go through their past year of receipts and file HSA reimbursements. Oh, cool. Or one that I do is anytime I book a flight, if the flight price drops, I then have my assistant hit up the airline and get me a travel credit.
哇。我有个朋友，用了我见过的最喜欢的应用案例。他把他的GrokBot连接到了家里的喷水系统，并把它与天气系统连接起来。真聪明。现在他的喷水系统根据天气情况来运作，这让他的水费减少了50%。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Wow. And I have a friend, this is my favorite use case I think I've seen yet. He hooked up his GrokBot to his sprinkler system at his home and connected it to the weather system. Oh, smart. And so now his sprinklers are dependent on the weather and it's dropped his water bill by 50%.
好的。我认为这些看不见的代理将执行节省成本的工作流程，会归入金融类别中。但它们真正专注的是那些能节省成本的活动，从而创造一个更符合消费者利益的世界。这也挺有趣的。我觉得美国消费者并不想听到关于如何省钱的信息，人们更希望听到关于如何花钱和免费的钱的消息。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah. And so I think these, like, invisible type agents that are going to be doing these cost saving type workflows fall within that finance category. But they're really going to lean into these, like, cost saving activities that create a world that is a lot more consumer aligned. Yeah, it'll be interesting, too. Like, I think the American consumer, nobody wants to hear about saving money. People want to hear about spending money and free money.
我觉得真正吸引很多人的亮点在于，这看起来就像是“免费”的钱。就像是，回过头去提交健康储蓄账户（HSA）的退款申请，就像得到免费的钱一样。又比如，获取所有已购的航空机票在票价降低时的补偿，就像是从达美航空获得免费的钱一样。我认为这是一个非常有吸引力的点。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And I actually think the hook that's going to get a lot of people here is it's going to feel like free money. Like, going back through and, you know, submitting HSA sort of refund requests is going to be free money. You know, getting all of your airline tickets where the price is dropped, you know, to refund you the Delta is going to be free money. So I think that that's a hugely powerful hook.
这也非常非常有趣，因为这是一种不常见但高价值的行为。这让我联想到旅游和金融领域。也许这些领域会发展成为非常有影响力的行业，可能是价值数十亿美元的企业，它们是垂直连接器而不是一般的水平代理。完全同意。在应用阶段，这将是一个非常有趣的世界，我认为这也是我们上次散步时谈到的，就是这种技术能实现什么。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
It's also really, really interesting because this is a sort of infrequent but high-value behavior. And that's where my head goes on both travel and finance. Like, maybe these things will be really powerful, you know, billion-dollar businesses that are still vertical connectors rather than general horizontal agents. Totally. It's going to be a very interesting world in terms of the application phase, which I think then, you know, that also something that we talked about last time we went for the walk was, okay, here's what it can do.
但现在，你究竟如何与那个助手互动呢？这是我们之前讨论过的，我很好奇你的看法。就像我们俩都使用iMessage，这对我们来说更方便。但你提到你的妻子和她的朋友更喜欢一个独立的应用。那么你认为这个世界的趋势会如何发展？你认为会有多个平台共存，还是最终会有一个占主导地位的平台？这是个很好的问题。我觉得这就是为什么消费者的偏好会在这里发挥重要作用。我听说过这样的说法：对于Z世代的人来说，他们更喜欢简单的短信，而千禧一代和X世代的人则更倾向于应用程序界面。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
But now, how do you actually interact with that agent? And it's something that we chatted on and I'm curious your thoughts, right? So, like, we both were in the world of iMessage. It's where we live. It's easier for us. But you mentioned your wife and her friends prefer a separate application. Yeah. And so, like, where do you see this world moving? Do you believe that multiple surfaces can exist as a winner or there's going to be one dominant lane? Yeah, it's a great question, man. I mean, I think this is why there's so much consumer preference that's going to matter here. Because I've heard the argument that for folks that are Gen Z, they're more interested in just texting. And for folks that are millennial or Gen X, they're interested in app interfaces.
所以，我认为部分原因可能与世代差异有关，也可能在某种程度上与性别差异有关。我的意思是，这是一种泛泛而谈，但我做的事情类型和我妻子做的事情类型有所不同。比如说，她非常喜欢制作梦想板，努力实现她的一年目标和一生目标。因此，她更喜欢视觉化的界面。对她来说，旅行等活动更多是视觉驱动的；而对我来说，它更具功能性。比如，我更关心如何从A地到B地，最好是飞机上有Starlink（卫星网络），这对我来说更实用。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So, I think part of it may fragment by generation. Part of it may actually fragment by gender as well to some extent. I mean, it's a generalization, but the types of things I'm doing versus the types of things my wife is doing. You know, she's big on building a dream board and trying to achieve all of her one-year goals and her lifelong goals. So, she really prefers a visual interface. You know, she does a lot of sort of travel is very visual-driven for her, whereas for me, it's much more functional. Like, hey, how do I just get from X to Y, ideally with Starlink on my plane, which works better for me.
我觉得iMessage空间更有价值。所以，当我在那个空间中交流时，感觉更像是一种个人互动。当然，如果每隔一条对话就跟一个客服交流，这种感觉会改变。但目前，我觉得它在我手机中处于一个独特的位置，而普通的应用程序没有这种感觉。你怎么看？是的，我完全同意。我觉得iMessage带来的个性化体验，因为我已经习惯使用它，感觉就像是与我密不可分的一部分，而不像是额外的操作流程。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
I feel like the iMessage, sort of, the iMessage space is more precious. So, it feels like a more personal interaction when I'm in that space. And now, of course, that changes if every second thread is with an agent. But for now, I feel like it kind of lives in a privileged place on my phone where, you know, the app on the app grid just doesn't. What do you think? Yep. I completely agree. I think the personalization that comes with iMessage, just because I already live there, it feels like it's something that's already connected to me. It doesn't feel like an additive workflow.
是啊，我主要看到的界面其实只有两个，一是iMessage，另一个是独立的应用程序。不过最近我还注意到一个新的初创公司，叫Sky。他们正在尝试引入一个iPhone小组件作为不同的界面，这挺有趣的。而且就是昨天，我们看到扎克伯格和Muse团队推出了Muse charm。这是一个完全不同的用例，展示了我们如何与智能助手互动。你怎么看待硬件呢？我觉得这很有意思。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah. And I really have only, though, seen, by and large, two surfaces appear. It's either the iMessage or a separate application. I've seen a third signal startup, actually, Sky. They have, like, an iPhone widget that they're trying to introduce as a different surface, which is pretty interesting. But then even yesterday, right, we saw Zuckerberg and the Muse team dropped the Muse charm. Yeah. That's now an entirely different use case for how we interact with an agent. What do you think about hardware? I think it's fascinating.
这段话的大意是：“有一个聪明人曾经说过，每个在硬件产品上工作的人都认为自己的硬件产品是最重要、最完美的。比如，有人觉得吊坠是最完美的，有人觉得表带是最完美的。但是我并不这么认为。我觉得这将会是一个非常个性化的选择，就像珠宝一样。有些人喜欢戴项链，有些人喜欢戴耳环。我认为这种形式将会根据客户的个人喜好而展现不同的风格。”
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
I mean, a smart person said this, which is that every person who's working on a piece of hardware thinks that their hardware is the kind of be-all, end-all. Like, the pendant is the ultimate thing. You know, the watch strap is the ultimate thing. So I don't think that that's right. I think, again, it's going to be very personal preference-driven, you know, just as jewelry is. Like, some people like to wear necklaces and some people like to wear earrings. And I think the same way this kind of form factor is going to manifest is going to be very customer-specific.
我认为，有一种价值在于拥有某种随身且无意识的设备，可以记录一天中发生的各种联系人、请求、承诺和约定。我的意思是，在隐私期望和社会方面，我们可能需要一起想办法处理。你知道的，你去华盛顿的餐厅时，他们会把你的手机收走。也许将来他们会把你的手机和挂饰都收走。但是我觉得硬件设备中确实有一些潜力。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
But I think that there's value in having something that is sort of with you and ambient and can capture all the kind of contacts and requests and, you know, promises and commitments and everything that happens through the day. I mean, I think we're going to have to sort of figure it out together in terms of privacy expectations and society. You know, you go to restaurants in Washington and they take away your phone. Maybe they're going to be taking away your phone and your pendant. Right. But I think that there's actually something there with hardware.
我很喜欢我们在这个方向上表现得很有雄心。过去十年里，创业公司一直被劝阻不要涉足硬件领域，而现在我们看到许多有趣的新消费产品。这非常令人兴奋。我有一个大胆的想法，认为这个Muse项目的重点其实并不是赢得硬件市场，而是为Meta团队在现实世界中收集数据。考虑到这个设备配备了摄像头和多个麦克风，它能提供关于现实世界运作方式的信息。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And I just like that we're being ambitious in that direction. You know, I think after 10 years of startups being discouraged from working on hardware, now we've got a lot of interesting new consumer efforts. Right. I think it's going to be super interesting. I have a hot take thesis that this Muse charm is actually less about trying to win the hardware game. And it's more about data collection in the real world for the meta team in terms of like how the real world actually functions, given it has a camera and multiple microphones.
这主要是因为，我不太认为这会被大众广泛采用。我觉得这会在推特圈子里被采用，他们会到处使用它。这就会为Meta提供大量数据，支持扎克伯格未来构建实际世界的元宇宙。但难道你不觉得他们已经通过智能眼镜获取这些数据了吗？我觉得在某种程度上获取了，但我不知道，或许我错了，眼镜会像这个小装置一样一直开着吗？我不这么认为。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And it's primarily, I don't really see it being a mass adoption thing. I think it's going to get adopted by the Twitter bubble and they're going to use it everywhere. And it's just going to feed meta with a ridiculous amount of data to fuel Zuckerberg's future metaverse of mapping out the actual world. But don't you think that they already get that from the glasses? I think they do to some extent, but I don't know if, I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but are the glasses always going to be on in the same way that this charm will be? I don't think so.
是的，这是一个很好的观点。我认为这个魅力更多是像你提到的那样，作为一个全天候的背景陪伴，而眼镜则更具有行动导向。这将会非常有趣。我试过VR发布版，那很有意思，但我实际上认为只有音频功能的眼镜可能会是一个潜在的热门产品。是的，我觉得这确实很吸引人。我想，人们应该会觉得，《安德的游戏》中的简实际上就是一个全知的仅有音频的伴侣。我不知道，不过我觉得有些人喜欢在脸上戴摄像头，但也有些人可能会意识到这可能让人不舒服。他们希望在不带来社交尴尬的情况下获得技术的连通性。音频本身非常了不起，我对语音和音频的发展持乐观态度。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah, it's a great point. I think the charm is meant to be more as, you know, as you mentioned, it's an ambient 24-7 companion versus the glasses are more action oriented. It's going to be fascinating. I thought the, you know, I've got to try the VR release. That was interesting, but I actually think that the audio only glasses might be a sleeper hit. Yep. I think there's something really compelling to that. I think people, you know, I mean, the vision of sort of Jane from Ender's Game was all about this sort of all knowing audio only companion. And I don't know, you know, I think there's a set of people that love to wear the kind of camera on their face, but others may be aware of the fact that it could make people uncomfortable. And they're like feeling like they have the technology connectivity without any of the social awkwardness of the camera. Audio is incredible. I'm quite bullish on voice and audio.
昨天，ChatGPT 语音功能更新，允许连接像你的Gmail和日历这样的应用。我今天早上试了一下，这对于我来说，是整个AI助手领域的第二个“魔法时刻”。真的。我骑自行车去上班，双手没空，但我想完成一些工作。所以我就开始对着ChatGPT 语音讲话。我打开了一个会话，开始和它聊天。在我骑车上班的30分钟里，它帮我分类邮件，把它们放到不同的标签里，回复邮件，发送日历邀请。我到达办公桌时，邮箱已经清空。这真是让人兴奋。所以这是ChatGPT 语音，而不是Muse，对吗？没错，是ChatGPT 语音。太棒了。我误解了，我还以为你说的是Muse 语音。我完全同意，我觉得ChatGPT基于GPT live one模型，是全双工语音，并且可以看到你所有的对话线程。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
ChatGPT voice yesterday dropped their ChatGPT voice to allow connectors in. So you can connect to like your Gmail and calendar. Yeah. Um, I played around with this morning and to me, it was my second magic moment of this whole AI assistant space. Really? Um, I was biking to work. Hands are busy. I want to get stuff done. And I just start talking to ChatGPT voice. I just opened up a session, start chatting with it. And throughout my 30 minute bike ride to work, categorized my emails, submitted them to different labels, replied to different emails, sent out calendar invites, got to the desk in box zero. It was, it was so electric. So this is ChatGPT voice, not Muse? Correct. ChatGPT voice. Amazing. Okay. I misunderstood you. I thought you'd said Muse voice. I totally agree. I think the ChatGPT, um, it's based on the GPT live one model. It's full duplex voice and it can see all your threads.
你可以问它一些事情，比如说，“嘿，我开始的那三个项目是什么？”以及“我们现在进展到哪一步了？”和“我遇到了哪些阻碍？”我觉得这是一个非常了不起的功能，而这一点在当前的系统中，既没有Muse也没有Instinct实现。不过，我认为扎克确实宣布了全双工语音功能，所以可能不久的将来会在Muse中实现。而且我确实认为，对于普通消费者来说，当你最忙碌的时候，助手是最有帮助的。你并不会坐在沙发上花大量时间使用助手来完成事情。助手最有用的是在你做园艺、烹饪或双手忙碌时，此时你无法直接操作界面。它就像一个“看不见的助手”，你只需说话然后它就会在后台执行任务。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So you can ask it things like, Hey, what are those three projects I started? And you know, where are we and what am I blocked on? I think it's an extraordinary capability and it's one that neither, you know, Muse nor Instinct has today. Though, though I think that Zuck actually did announce full duplex voice. So maybe it's coming to Muse soon. Definitely is coming. But I, I do think that for the general consumer, an assistant is most helpful when you are most occupied, right? It's not like you're going to be sitting down on your couch and spending all of your time using your assistant to do stuff. It's most helpful when you're gardening or cooking or doing things where your hands are busy and you can't actually engage with an interface. And, you know, it goes back to that, like invisible assistant where you can just talk and say something and it just goes and runs and does something in the background.
我认为，那些长期在线、总是盯着手机或电脑的科技圈，与普通大众的生活环境非常不同。因此，我很期待看到这种技术如何实现大规模普及，普通消费者又是如何看待这种助手的。当这种助手真的出现时，它是否能够解决消费者的实际问题？比如，当他们不愿意做某些繁琐的事情时（例如，收到交通罚单，需要支付罚款时），助手能否代劳处理这些事情？只需拍张照片，让助手替你解决，这将会非常有趣。接下来我想和你谈谈社交媒体。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And I, I think that the tech bubble that is chronically online and on their phone and in front of a computer is a very different environment than the general population. And so I'm, I'm really excited to see how does this actually hit mass adoption and how does like the average consumer think about an assistant when it's actually like, is it going to be an assistant that solves real pain points for them where they're going to use it when something is really, really painful because they don't want to do it. Like you get a traffic ticket, you want, you have to go pay for that traffic ticket. Great. Just take a picture and let your agent go do it for you. Um, it's going to be interesting to see. So the next thing I wanted to talk to you about was social.
嗯，我们之前讨论过在多人游戏中，特别是谈到iMessage如何成为一个特权平台，这是本能中的一个很酷的特性。但是，根据我的经验，把智能代理加入到群聊中时，总会感觉有些侵扰或者会降低社交资本。你有没有见过什么效果好的例子？以及你对这些代理如何实现多用户状态有什么看法？很多人都尝试过这一点。我看到过三种不同的方法。第一种方法就是传统的方法，把代理添加到群聊中，就像是群聊和你的伙伴一样。第二种方法是我看到本能采用的方式，他们有一个代理网络，你可以邀请另一个代理，他们会在幕后代表你交谈。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Um, you know, we talked in multiplayer generally, you know, we talked about how iMessage is this sort of privileged place to be, which is actually one of the cool things about, um, instinct. However, in my experience, building agents that you add to group chats somehow feels intrusive or like it diminishes social capital. Have you seen anything that works well? And what are your kind of theories for how these agents get, um, get to a multiplayer state? A lot of people have tried it. I think I've seen three different approaches. Uh, the first approach is your traditional attitude group chat. And it's just like the group chat and your companion. The second approach I've seen is how instinct did it, where you have like an agent network where you invite another agent and they're talking behind the scenes on your behalf.
他们会通过一种我见过的第三种方式来更新你，这种方式我觉得最有趣。呃，这是一个叫 Doc 的新产品，由一个叫 Shane Mack 的人创建。据我所知，它也是由 a16z 支持的公司之一，叫 XMTP。他们的方法有点像格兰诺拉麦片。你可以在群聊中添加一个代理，但是这个代理是沉默的，它只是一个听众，在记录人们谈话的内容。如果它发现了需要行动的项目，它会在单独的消息线程中独立通知相关人员。如果你想知道大家在谈论什么，可以进入实际的文档，查看记录的内容。这样一来，它就更像是一个隐形助手，你甚至感觉不到它的存在，但它完成了你希望多人功能提供的所有管理工作。如果有需要行动的事项，它不会打扰大部分人。这种方法真的很酷，我一定要试试。我非常喜欢这一点，而且我喜欢它已经是一个由 a16z 支持的公司。显然，你知道了，我对这件事的看法，而 Nir from Obo 也表示支持，我认为他说的是对的。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And they'll update you as to what's going on the third way that I've seen it, which I think is the most interesting. Uh, it's a new one called doc, uh, by this guy, Shane Mack. Um, I think also an a 16, Z, uh, a 16, Z company, um, XMTP, and they are approaching it more like granola. Uh, so you add an agent to a group chat, but that agent is silent and it's purely a listener. It's taking notes on what people are talking about. And if it has an action item, it independently will ping the person in a separate message thread. And then if you want to see what people are talking about, you can go into the actual docs and see what it's taken notes on. And that way it's more of, again, it's, it's your invisible agent. You don't know it's there. It's doing all the admin work that you would want out of a, a multiplayer function. And if it needs action items, it doesn't bother the majority of the group. Really, really cool approach. I've got to try that out. I love that. And I love that it's an a 16, Z company already. Of course, um, you know, my theory on this, if you look at this, and Nir from Obo said it, and he, you know, I think he's right.
模型在可验证领域（如编程）上的进展当然是指数级的，但在散文质量甚至像床边谈话这样方面的进步可能已经停滞，甚至可能变得更糟。因此，我实际上认为，就目前模型的状态以及或许是我们自身的期望而言，在这些社会动态方面，我不认为有太多方法能让这些智能体促进和增强群体的社交连结。相反，我觉得那些非常实用的智能体可能更有帮助。我在做的一个实验是将智能体加入我与其他收藏爱好者交流的聊天中，试图整理我们各自的收藏和品味。我还没有完全做到，但至少感觉这是对群体的一种真正的增益，而不是一个我们不想让它说话时叽叽喳喳的低情商机器人。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Which is the progress the models are making on verifiable domains like coding are of course exponential, but the progress they've made on just pros quality and even like bedside manner has maybe plateaued or maybe is even getting worse. So I actually think that with the, the models as they are today and perhaps with our own expectations, you know, in terms of these social dynamics, I don't think there's a lot of ways that the agents can contribute and enhance the sort of social connectivity of the group. You know, conversely, I think agents that are very utilitarian, you know, one of the experiments I've been doing is adding it. I'm a collector, you know, collect records and a bunch of other things, adding an agent to the chats where I talk to my fellow collector friends and trying to catalog our respective collections and our tastes. And I haven't quite hit it, but it at least feels like it's something that's genuinely additive to the group rather than, you know, this sort of low EQ robot that's chattering when we don't want it to.
是的，完全同意。你应该试试Doc，我认为你会对它感到非常着迷。我会的。本周我听到的另一个有趣观点是，关于消息传递，它不太适合这些代理交互，因为在消息传递中，好像是某个人在掌控对话。让代理掌控对话会让人感到不舒服，而如果是在类似Discord或者传统网页表单的环境中，那其实是一个代理可以发布信息的地方，然后你可以选择是否参与，就像Reddit那样，但出于某些原因，它比群聊感觉不那么侵入。我不知道，挺有意思的。我们似乎在试图将这些代理过于人性化了。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yep, totally. You'll, you should, you should give a, you should give Doc a try. I think, I think you're going to be quite fascinated by it. I will. Yeah. Yeah. The other interesting take that I heard this week was that, you know, something about messaging in particular is, it doesn't lend itself to these agent interactions because in messaging, it's as if somebody has the mic. And it feels uncomfortable to give the agent, the mic, whereas if you look at something like maybe closer to a discord or even a traditional web form, that's actually something where an agent can make a post and you can either engage with the post or not Reddit style, but for some reason it feels less intrusive than group chat. I don't know. Yeah. Interesting. It's almost, it's almost as if we're trying to humanize these agents a little too much.
没错。我认为这里还涉及另一个方面，也就是如果你观察代理这个角色的实际设计，有些公司尝试让它像是一个AI生成的人类。而还有像Muse这样的公司，它们的设计就像一个可爱的雪人。我觉得看到全世界都爱上这个雪人真的很有意思，它实在是太可爱了。而像AI生成的人类，正如你所指出的，我认为人们可能会感到有些不舒服。在自己的个人空间里，这些助手被赋予太多的人性化特征，感觉有点怪。所以，我想问一个相关的问题，你认为市场是否按性格或原型进行细分呢？我们在散步时聊到了一点这个话题，有些人可能更喜欢严肃、粗犷、权威的医生这种类型。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
That's right. Like, and I think that comes to another component where if you look at the actual design of the character of the agent, I see some companies that have it try to be like an AI generated human. And then you have other companies like Muse that it's just like adorable Yeti. And I think it's really interesting to see how the world has fallen in love with this Yeti. It's just so cute and adorable. Yes. And the like AI generated human, to your point, like, I think people feel a little uncomfortable. Like, it feels weird to humanize these assistants so much in your, like, in your personal space. So one related question I wanted to ask you is, do you think that the market segments by personality or archetype, you know, we were chatting a bit about this in our walk, but, you know, some people prefer a kind of serious, gruff, authoritative doctor.
有些人更喜欢那种温暖友好、感觉像是同伴的医生。这只是医生的两种不同类型。显然，没有医生可以同时具备这两种特质，因为它们是对立的。你觉得代理人也会有这样的区别吗？我认为每个人都肯定会偏爱不同的沟通风格。比如，Poke一开始就给人一种强烈的个性。它的个性很鲜明，我有很多朋友都说：他们拒绝向Poke提供任何个人信息，因为它太有个性了，甚至让他们在对话中感到不舒服。但我不认为个性真的是一种难以超越的优势，因为个性是很容易配置的。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And some people prefer a, you know, warm and friendly, you know, sort of a doctor that feels like a peer. And those are just two different archetypes of doctors. Obviously, no doctor is both of those things. They're in opposition. Do you think the same will be true of agents? I think everyone for sure prefers a different style of communication. Poke came out of the gates hot, right? The personality of poke is quite distinctive. And it's something that I have a lot of friends who are like, I refuse to give poke any of my personal information because it's so sassy. And it actually makes me uncomfortable to engage in a conversation with it. But I don't think personality is really a defensible moat because it's quite easy to configure.
这段话的意思是：就像你作为消费者，你通过短信告诉你的代理，希望它以某种方式回应你。然后，它就会把这些偏好记下来或者保存到它的文件中。这样你就可以放心了，它会根据你的偏好进行调整。我认为我们将进入一个阶段，不管哪个通用代理最终成为领导者，它都会具有高度的可配置性。每个人都可以根据自己的喜好调整代理对话的方式，让自己感到最舒适。这很有趣，我同意你的看法。但让我尝试一下反驳的观点，不仅是个性，还包括某种“宪法”，这个词可能不太恰当，但用来形容一种定义特征，比如自以为是。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
It's like you as a consumer, you text your agent, you say that you would prefer it responds in a certain way. It just saves that to its memory or its sole file. And then you're good to go and it changes. I think we'll get to a place where whatever general agent ends up being the leader, that it'll be quite configurable. And each person can kind of tailor the agent to speak to them how, you know, however makes them most comfortable. So that's interesting. And I agree with you. But maybe let me try the steel man here for not just personality, but kind of, you know, constitution, for lack of a better word. Which is an example of a kind of defining characteristic is presumptuousness.
你知道，我们曾经谈到过这个话题，有些工作需要代理非常主动，即使有10%的错误率也无所谓，只要能够经常把事情完成。而另一些代理，比如我们的财务代理，可能需要非常谨慎。所以我有点好奇，现在我们所描述的这些代理的“个性”是否开始影响其能力，尤其是在面对模棱两可的情况时如何做出决定。我认为积极主动性确实有很大的优势，这可能是区分成功者和普通者的关键。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
You know, we've talked a little bit about this and there are some jobs for which you want the agent to be highly presumptuous and you'd rather have it make mistakes 10% of the time as long as it often gets things done. And there are other styles of agents like our finance agent, perhaps, where you want it to be highly cautious. So I sort of wonder if some of these things, which we're now describing as personality, start to push down into sort of capabilities and, you know, how it tie breaks in a position of ambiguity. And perhaps there's a bit more defensibility around that. I think there is massive defensibility around proactivity. I think that's actually going to be something that separates the winner from the, you know, the meat of the pack.
最具主动性的代理，可以充当看不见的助手，在你没有请求的情况下为你处理事务。我认为目前我们看到的最酷的"哇！"时刻，就是代理为你办理登机手续。不过，如你所说，这主要分为两个类别。有些工作流程中，你希望保持控制权，并不希望代理过于主动地替你做决定。是的，我认为这些流程通常需要你改变行动。例如，一个代理可能识别出你用的保险费用过高，并建议你换一家保险公司。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
The agent that can be most proactive, that can serve as an invisible assistant and start doing things on your behalf without you even asking. I think the best, like, gimmick, cool, aha moment that we've seen so far is checking into your flight for you. To your point, though, it really does come down to two categories. There's some workflows where you want to retain control and you don't really want an agent to be acting too proactive on your behalf. Yeah. And I think those are workflows that require a change in action on your side. So maybe that is, an agent identifies that the insurance you're using is charging too much money and thinks you should switch insurances.
是的。在进行这种转换之前，系统应该先获得你的许可，因为这会直接影响到你。但是，如果是为了帮你省钱、省时间而主动采取一些措施，比如草拟邮件或为你获取航班积分，而你不需要做任何事情，这种情况下就没问题。所以，研究如何对这些行为进行分类和分解会很有趣。但这种划分非常微妙，因为一旦越界，你可能马上就会失去用户的信任。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah. It should probably get your permission before it actually makes that switch because that's a direct action on your behalf that impacts you. However, the proactiveness of, hey, I drafted this email for you or I got a flight credit on your behalf. If there's no action needed on your side, it's just saving you money, it's saving you time. So I think it'll be interesting to see, like, how do we really categorize and break down those type of behaviors. But it will be a very fine line because if you cross that line once, I think you immediately lose all trust with your user.
是啊，这很有趣。你知道，我们内部开玩笑说，我们快到了这样的地步：某个代理会发信息给某个人，说：“我注意到你对她没那么感兴趣，所以我帮你和她分手了。”对，就是这样。我觉得这种事情真的会发生。但你知道，我认为其中的魅力在于这种冒失的行为。我觉得如果你没有看到人们在社交平台上发文说，“那个代理做了这个，那个代理做了那个”，那可能意味着这些代理在这个方向上还不够激进。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah, it'll be interesting. You know, we were joking internally, like, we're days away from an agent messaging someone saying, I noticed you weren't that into her, so I went ahead and broke up with her for you. Yep. You know, so like. Saw that one. It's going to happen, man, but, you know, I think a lot of the magic comes from the presumptuousness. And I think that if you didn't see people posting on X about, oh, the agent did this, the agent did that, it would probably be a sign that the agents are not pushing hard enough in this direction.
好的。我觉得会有些事情发生。实际上，我也很好奇。首先，我有点怀疑那篇关于“Bong Chang”的帖子是否真实。对于那些不知道的人，有一位网友发推说，Instinct系统给他办理登机手续时，将他的中间名错误识别为“Bong Chang”，导致他无法登机。所以我不确定这是不是只是一个恶搞帖，还是真的发生过。不过我很好奇那个人是否仍在使用Instinct。我猜他可能还在用，因为那篇帖子吸引了很多关注。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Right. Like, I think there's going. And actually, I'd be curious to know. First of all, I'm, you know, a little suspicious of whether the Bong Chang post was even real. And for folks who don't know, there's a person who tweeted that Instinct checked him into a flight and hallucinated his middle name as Bong Chang and he wasn't able to get on the flight. So I'm not sure if that's just shitposting or if that really happened. But I'd be curious to know if that person is still using Instinct. I'm guessing they are. I would assume so, purely given the traction of that post.
他们可能在那里找更多的内容。如果没有别的，至少那里是一个可以找到幽默和流行推文的来源。对吧，对吧。也许，Taka，你知道，感觉一个发生的大事情是，在开放爪期开发的那些基本操作，现在已经产品化，让大众市场的消费者能够更容易理解和欣赏。你认为，还有像你几次提到的Polk那样的公司，Polk真的是很了不起。我觉得他们做得特别聪明。如果他们晚六个月开始，可能会成为赢家。我觉得他们的团队真的非常有才华。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
They're probably feeding for more content there. If nothing else, at least just a source of comedic, popular tweets. Right. Right. Maybe, Taka, you know, it feels like one of the big things that's happened is that the kind of primitives that were developed during the open claw period have now been productized in a way that the mass market consumer can sort of, you know, digest and appreciate. Do you think there are, and also Polk, which you had mentioned a couple of times, like, Polk was extraordinary. I think they did a super clever job. And I think if they had started six months later, they might have ended up being the winner. I think the team is really, really talented there.
我很想知道他们接下来会给我们带来什么惊喜，因为我相信，现在他们成为Cognition的一部分后，肯定没有停止在这方面的工作。我很好奇，他们在开放爪时代所学到的技能或经验，会不会告诉我们消费类智能助手的未来发展。目前，我感觉消费类智能助手几乎只是开放爪的复制，只不过是预先配置好的而已。我发现，在个人助手领域，并没有出现那些用开放爪或Hermes做不到的东西。实际上，只是无需自行配置所有东西，并且不再每七小时就出现错误信息而已。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And I'll be curious to see what they actually have in store for us next, because I'm sure that, you know, now that they're a part of Cognition, they haven't stopped working on this. I'd be very curious to know if there are capabilities or lessons from the open claw era that you noticed that you think are going to tell us what's coming next in consumer agents. Right now, I honestly see the consumer agent is literally just a replication of open claw, but it's just pre-configured. I don't see much happening in the personal assistant space that you can't do with open claw or Hermes. It's just a matter of fact that you don't have to configure everything and you're not getting error messages popping up every seven hours.
好的。而且使用起来非常简单，界面也很友好。所以我们拭目以待。我认为这个领域的发展方向将继续朝着积极主动的方向前进。我还认为，随着更多超专业化的出现，这个领域将继续发展，这与您关于狭窄型初创公司的论点相符。当我们看到更多这种长尾机会时，比如，与其做一个通才，我会把所有时间都用来让我的助手成为专注于有3岁以下孩子的单亲妈妈的专家，这个领域会变成什么样子呢？
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah. And it's really easy to use. It's an easy interface. So we'll see what happens. I think the direction of the space will continue to move towards proactivity. I think the direction of the space will continue to see more hyper-specialization, which I think goes to your point in your thesis of narrow startups. And how does the space look as we see more of these long-tail opportunities, whether it is, you know, instead of being a generalist, I'm going to spend all of my time focusing my assistant to be an expert for single mothers with children under the age of three.
好的。它了解母亲如何在日常生活中运作、孩子的发展情况，感觉就像这个助手能够读懂母亲的心思一样。这可能可以作为一个插件应用到通用助手中。但我好奇的是，既然这是你的论点，你是如何看待这一点的？首先，请给我们更多了解你所定义的狭义初创企业是什么，以及你如何看待它们的作用？
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah. And it knows everything about how a mother operates her day-to-day life, child development, where it literally feels like that assistant is reading their mind. And that could maybe be a plug-in into the generalist. But, you know, I'm curious with this being your thesis, how do you think about, you know, I guess first give us some more insight on what narrow startups are to you and how do you see that playing?
好的。狭义创业公司的理论是，你现在可以为很少的人开发出非常有野心和非常有价值的软件。之前已经有了用户每月支付200美元、250美元或300美元的案例。因此，你可以创造一个年收入达到1000亿美元的业务，仅需数万人参与，这在过去是从未有过的。这在很大程度上也是因为现在的技术能力可以达到了极其专业化的程度。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah. The theory with narrow startups is that, you know, you can now build software that's incredibly ambitious and incredibly valuable for a very small number of people. And we have this precedent of people paying, you know, $200, $250, $300 a month. So you can build, you know, $100 billion run rate business with tens of thousands of people, which has never really existed in the past. A lot of it also is that the capabilities can be specialized to such an astounding degree.
当我们考虑你在讨论的内容时，我完全同意你的看法。我认为会存在这种比较优势。我想这将是品味和专有知识的结合。就像你知道的，有些助产士可能会采用一种特定的方式来帮助女性分娩，而你也可能会有一位个人代理人，他们可能也会遵循某种思想流派或风格，甚至是一些不那么被理解的课程。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And then as we think about what you're discussing, I totally agree with you. I think there will be this kind of comparative advantage. I think it's going to be a combination of taste and proprietary knowledge. You know, there may be just as you, you know, you have a doula that may subscribe to a certain sort of style of, you know, helping women give birth. You may have a personal agent that actually subscribes to a certain school of thought or style or, you know, even a set of lessons that aren't well understood.
你会雇佣那个代理人来为你提供这项服务。至于专有数据，你提到过可能会有一个专门为纽约市服务的个人代理。我认为，就像有一个品味无可挑剔、很难被复制的礼宾员，他知道所有你会喜欢的最佳地点。也可能会有其他十几位礼宾员，他们为另外十多种不同类型的人或群体提供服务。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And you're going to hire that agent to sort of provide that service to you. And then proprietary data, you know, you had mentioned potentially having a personal agent just for New York City. Well, I think, you know, just as there might be a concierge that's got A-plus taste that's hard to replicate, that knows all the best spots that you're going to love. And there may be another dozen for, you know, another dozen different people or archetypes of people.
我确实认为，在未来会出现主观和客观的专业化。这个过程将会非常有趣。我也很好奇从你的视角出发，注意到我们在对话中交替使用“助手”和“代理人”这两个词。在推特上，人们一直在讨论这个问题。这个生态系统的未来，是会发展成个人助手还是个人代理人呢？
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
I do think that there'll be this sort of subjective and objective specialization that happens. It's going to be interesting to follow. I'm also curious from your lens, even just noticing our conversation here. We interchange between assistant and agent. And it's been a constant conversation I see people talking about on Twitter. Is the future of this ecosystem, is it going to be a personal assistant or a personal agent?
好的。这对你来说意味着什么呢？ 哦，那真是个好问题，朋友。我的意思是，对我来说，“助理”是一种低于“代理”的形式。你可以想象，代理就像是社交群体中的一个平等成员，也许我们需要一个比“代理”更好的词。而助理则只能按照你的要求去做事。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah. And what do those mean to you? Oh, that's such a great question, man. I mean, to me, assistant is a sort of lesser form than agent. You know, for me, an agent is somebody, you could imagine them being a peer in a social group, you know, and maybe we need a better word than agent. But an assistant can only sort of definitionally do what you ask it to do.
它可以帮助你完成你指示它去做的事情，而一个代理人则拥有自主权，能在世界上创造好的事情。也许这与企业中的代理和人工智能的发展有些相似。它们起初可能像是实习生，通过不断的工作和提高智能，最终能够晋升到企业中进行更高阶的工作。这就引发了一个思考：在消费者的生活中，一个助手以及之后的代理被“晋升”去承担更专业和精细的工作意味着什么？我对此非常关注。我也对其可能产生的影响感到好奇，比如在人类的社会层面上，"代理"这个词是否使得我们不足够拟人化人工智能？"助手"这个词是否让这个体验显得过于人性化，而让社会感到不适？
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
It can assist you in doing something that you've directed it to do while an agent has agency and can just make good things happen in the world. And maybe this parallels a little bit, you know, the sort of agents and AI in the enterprise where they've sort of started as interns. And through, you know, doing work and improved intelligence, they're able to get promoted into doing higher order forms of work in the enterprise. Like, what does it mean for an assistant and later an agent to be promoted in the consumer's life to do more specialized and delicate work? I'm super aligned. I'm also very interested what ramifications it might have and just like the social layer of humanity where, you know, does the word agent allow us to, you know, not personify AI enough? You know, is assistant, does it add too much human to the experience and does that make society uncomfortable?
这将会很有趣，我们就像身处在各自的泡泡中，而你所处的泡泡更大，因为你在旧金山。旧金山被认为是世界的科技中心。我觉得纽约稍微落后于旧金山，而世界其他地方则稍微落后于纽约。所以会很有趣，看看大家如何看待这一领域的术语。我不确定这是否是个泡泡。我只是觉得这更像是未来，你知道的，好像我们已经身处在近未来。我其实觉得这可能会大大提升和改善社会互动的动态。因为你开始考虑把某个代理视作非人类的。这可以提供一个社交的间接层面，可能有些对我来说难以启齿的事情，或者在一个群体中存在一些尴尬的社交动态，这些都可以通过这种方式改善。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
It'll be interesting to see like how the, we're in bubbles, you're in a more bubble, you're in SF. So you're in like the tech hub of the world. I would say New York is a little behind SF and then, you know, the rest of the world catches up after. So it'll be interesting to see how people actually think about the vernacular of the space. I don't know if it's a bubble. I just think it's like, it's like the future, you know, it's like, you know, we're in the near future. Yeah. Yeah, I don't know. I actually think that it could increase and improve a lot of social dynamics as well. Because you start to think about the agent as a non-human. It can provide a layer of social indirection, you know, so there might be something that's sort of awkward for me to say to you or an uncomfortable social dynamic that's occurring in a group.
我认为，通过精心设计的代理，这些代理可以帮助以一种不带情感的方式处理冲突，可能是通过提供反馈或者组织协调。因为它们就像是冲突的仲裁者一样。有潜力做到这一点。对。对。现在，我并不是在提倡一种更加被动或消极的社交系统，但我确实认为这些代理可以成为一种社交间接沟通的源头和目的地。如果这能够理解的话。对吧。对吧。我认为它们将对世界产生显著的积极影响。那么，如果我们展望未来五年，看下这些代理或者助手将带领我们走向何方呢？
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And with a very carefully designed agent, I think the agent can, you know, help to, I don't know whether it's provide feedback or sort of organize a conflict in a way that feels non-emotional. Because you know, it's like an arbiter of confrontation. Potentially. Yeah. Yeah. Now, you know, I'm not advocating for a more passive aggressive sort of social system, but I do think it's interesting that they can be a sort of source and a destination for social indirection. If that makes sense. Right. Right. And I think that it will have a lot of like significantly positive influences in the world. How do you see AI impacting, right? If we look five years down the line, where do these agents, where do these assistants actually take us?
他们如何让我们成为更快乐的人？这是个很好的问题，我是说，我确实认为这些是我们真正想要解决的根本问题。我们谈到了生产力、财务和健康。还有很多日常琐事。你知道吗，我昨天查了一下，在这个国家每年有150万人因为酒驾被抓。看看其中需要处理的行政负担，还有这些人当中有多少能请到律师。所以，你觉得这种官僚压力几乎是被施加在普通消费者身上的吗？
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
How do they make us happier human beings? It's a great question, man. I mean, I do think that those are the problems that we're really after at the root of things. You know, we talked about productivity. We talked about finances and health. There's a lot of mundane things. You know, I was looking this up yesterday, but 1.5 million people a year in this country get a DUI. And look, like I can, the amount of administrative burden that's probably implied by that and how many of those people have access to attorneys. And so do you think there's almost this sort of bureaucratic pressure that's applied to the average consumer?
所以我认为第一步是如何减轻那种官僚作风的压力，让人们能够在财务上获得优化，健康得到改善，并且让他们可以同样接触到如律师或富人可能拥有的家庭办公室等资源。我觉得这其中更大的问题是，我母亲常说，得到想要的东西最难的是知道自己想要什么。就像，我们到底真正追求的是什么？这些助手能够通过哪些方式与我们互动？
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So I think step one is how do we sort of relieve that bureaucratic pressure and have people, you know, be financially optimized, have their health be optimized and have them have the same access to whether it's an attorney or a kind of family office that somebody who's wealthy might have. Then I think the bigger question, you know, I grew up with my mother saying the hardest part about getting what you want is knowing what you want. It's like, what are we all truly after? And what are the ways that these assistants can sort of engage us?
我认为这不仅仅是简单的目标问题。我不知道有多少人甚至有明确的目标。我认为很多时候，人们只是努力去发现自我，努力成为最好的、最真实的自己。这种自我发展与我们在世界中的主观体验之间的互动，加上机器的参与，可能会为我们带来一个非常美好的未来。我完全赞同。我设想在这个未来，我的孩子们会观看当代人走在街上低头盯着手机的老视频。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And I don't think it's as simplistic as just goals. I don't know how many people even have goals. I think a lot of it is people are just trying to, you know, find out who they are and turn into the best, most authentic versions of themselves. And this kind of interplay between our own self-development and our subjective experience in the world and these machines could be a very beautiful future for us. Totally. I see this future where I envision this world where my future kids are going to be looking at old videos of the current generation walking down the street, you know, next crane down, staring at your phone.
是啊。你在做什么呢？外面的世界这么美好，为什么你要把时间都花在盯着屏幕上？是的，我很喜欢这种想法。因为，希望这能让我们自动化许多事情。这样，作为父母，你就可以有更多时间陪伴孩子。作为一个二十多岁的成年人，你可以有更多时间与朋友交谈。我真的很好奇这将如何以各种方式改善生活，减少那些你真的不喜欢做的琐事，比如生活中的管理工作。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah. What are you doing? Like, it is a beautiful world out there. Like, why are you spending all of your time staring at a screen? Yeah, I love that. Because in, you know, hopefully it's going to allow us to automate so many of those things. So as a parent, you can actually spend more time with your kids. As an adult in your 20s, you can actually spend more time talking to friends. Yeah. And it's, I'm really curious to see how it will just change life for the better in so many ways of reducing the things that you just really hate to do. But it's like the life admin work.
对，没错。我的意思是，这也是为什么我认为很多时候编程代理不和人类程序员竞争，因为它们在做一些人类程序员从未做过的事情。不管是创建这个充满想象力的副项目，我一直在建一个可以进去逛的虚拟唱片店。之后我会发个链接给你，真的很酷。几年前，我绝不会雇一个程序员来做这样的项目，因为那时候我不可能花一年时间做这件事。所以这些东西是以前不会发生的。我认为我们生活中有很多这样的技术让我们能探索以前从未想过的东西。这不是成本削减的问题，而是可能性拓展的问题。这让生活更有趣，也让生活更精彩。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah, that's right. And I mean, that's also why I think that, you know, so many times coding agents are not computing with human programmers because they're doing things that no human programmers are doing. You know, whether it's building this ridiculous side project. I've been building a virtual record shop that you can walk into. I'll send you a link to it after. It's awesome. Like, I would never hire a programmer to work on that five or seven, ten years ago. I would have never spent the year of my life that it would have taken. So all of this stuff is the sort of things that never would have happened otherwise. And I think that there's a lot of versions of this technology in our life where we're just getting to explore things we never would have explored anyway. It's not about cost reduction. It's about possibility expansion. Yeah. Makes life more fun. It makes life more interesting.
你知道的，回到近期的话题，我最近一直在思考一个问题，我很想听听你的看法，就是关于Moldbook的教训。我在想有哪些是即将需要构建的“代理原生”系统。这可能类似于Instinct所做的，他们在试图建立一种“本能对本能”的网络。不过我确实觉得，将会有专门为代理间互动而存在的基础设施和产品，这些在今天还不存在。你怎么看？这将会是一个全新的范式。我认为这将打开一个崭新的局面，这本身可能就是一个可以讨论十小时的话题。比如说，代理电子邮件、代理电话号码，以及当服务不再是由人预定给人，也不再是由代理替人预定，而是代理之间互相预定时，服务会是什么样子。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
You know, to kind of come back to the near term, a thing that I've been thinking a bunch about that I'm curious for your take on is, you know, the lessons of Moldbook. And what are these sort of agent native systems that are going to need to be built? And maybe this is some of what Instinct is doing with their kind of instinct to instinct network. But it does feel like there's going to be infrastructure and products that exist only for agent-to-agent interactions that doesn't exist today. What do you think? It's going to be a whole new paradigm. I think it opens up. And I think that can be a 10-hour conversation on its own. You have agent emails, you have agent phone numbers, you have what does the world of service look like when it's no longer human booking to human and no longer agent booking from human, but it's now agent booking from agent.
这将如何重新定义整个服务行业呢？然后，还有一个整体的网络安全部分。互联网首先出现，然后是网络安全；代理（agents）首先出现，现在是这些代理的安全部分。那么这会创造出什么样的行业呢？其中的美妙之处在于，这就是资本主义的魅力所在。有这么多机会，还有这么多问题需要通过这些代理来解决。我认为，看到许多初创公司涌现出来，试图解决所有这些细分问题，以真正构建新一波的互联网和数字连接，这是不可避免的。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And how does that redefine the entire service industry as a whole? And then you have like the whole cybersecurity component of all this stuff, which is, okay, well, you know, internet came first, then came cybersecurity, agents came first, now comes the security component of these agents. And what industry is that going to create? The beautiful part of it, although I think that's the beauty of capitalism. There's like so much opportunity and so many problems to solve with these agents. And I think it is inevitable that we're going to see so many startups popping up trying to figure out all of these niche problems to really build this like new wave of internet and digital connectivity.
是啊，这一定会很有趣，特别是在电子商务方面。我一直把网络想象成有三种组成部分，就像我内心有两个狼，网络则分为三个领域：电商网络、应用网络和内容网络。其中内容网络已经有一段时间面临困境了，而电商网络表现得相当不错。自从编程代理问世以来，应用网络确实在迅速发展。但电商网络最引人注目。这周你也看到了，Shopify接受了Muse，而亚马逊则阻止了Muse。我想，这其中考虑的一部分是，当新的流量入口出现时，谁会赢，谁会输。这些流量会流向这些市场平台。对吧？你怎么看亚马逊和Shopify之间具体发生了什么，以及更广泛地说，哪些可能是赢家或输家？
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah, it's going to be cool to see, you know, because especially commerce, you know, I always think of the web as kind of there's three webs within the web, you know, just like there's two wolves inside me. The three webs are the commerce web, the application web, and the content web. And the content web has been in trouble for a while. I think that the commerce web has actually done really well. And then the application web has definitely been on a huge upswing ever since coding agents were released. But the commerce web is fascinating. You know, you saw this week how Shopify embraced Muse and Amazon blocked Muse. I think part of the calculus is who's going to be a winner or a loser when you actually have a new front door for how traffic flows. flows to these marketplaces. Right. I mean, do you have a view on what specifically happened with Amazon and Shopify and maybe more broadly who the winners and losers are likely to be?
好的，我认为首先，Shopify 和 Amazon 有着完全不同的商业模式。Shopify 致力于将商业民主化，而 Amazon 则主要依靠广告收入来盈利。整个商业广告结构将会非常有趣，因为一旦去掉了人工观看，就失去了系统的核心意义。我觉得这就是 Amazon 的立场：如果允许 Muse 和类似的自动化代理进行购买而不产生任何广告收入，这将大幅减少利润。所以，我认为他们可能需要在新环境中找到新的盈利模式，这种环境下，代理会替代人类进行购买。而相比之下，Shopify 则是在赋能普通人尽可能多地销售，而代理进一步推动了这一商业民主化的进程。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah. So I think, you know, first off, Shopify and Amazon are two completely different business models. You have Shopify that's hyper focused on more democratizing commerce. So you have Amazon that makes all of their money on ad revenue. And so the whole ad structure of commerce is going to be really fascinating to watch because when you remove human eyeballs, it defeats the entire purpose of the system. And so I think that's where Amazon was coming from. Like if you let Muse and these agents start to purchase without them getting any ad revenue out of that, it really takes a lot of the profit out of the experience. So I think there's likely going to be some new paradigm for how they're able to profit in this world where agents are purchasing on their behalf versus a Shopify that is empowering the everyday individual to sell as much as possible and agents democratize this space even further.
所以，我觉得这真是非常有利可图的一件事。未来，我们可以关注那些尚未被触及的行业，我认为这将更有趣。上周我们讨论过餐饮业，以预订为例：当你想预订时，你会发现像Rezzy这样的服务开始关停一些用户的账户，因为这些用户使用浏览器进行操作，而他们不希望机器人参与。这使得整个以人为本的预订体验丧失了意义。如果你让代理马上完成所有预订，这就完全颠覆了平台的目的。那么，当每个人都有这样一个代理时会发生什么呢？每个人都在同一个起跑线上，大家可以同时去预订餐厅。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So it's just unbelievably advantageous I think it's going to be even more interesting when we look at industries that have yet to be touched. And that's something we chatted about last week was restaurants where if you look at the booking space, right, like you go to make a reservation. I think we saw Rezzy started shutting people's accounts down because they were using browser use and they didn't want bots. So it defeats the whole the whole business of if you just let agents take these reservations instantaneously, then kind of defeats the purpose of the platform of this like human oriented booking experience. And so what happens, though, when everyone has an agent now, everyone's on the same playing field, everyone can go to book the restaurant at the same time.
我们是否会进入这样一个世界：一种可能是，餐厅重新掌握一定的权力，可以根据顾客的忠诚度或平均消费额度来决定把预订位子留给谁？或者，我们会进入一个竞争激烈的世界，在那里所有事情都变成了这些代理之间的竞价大战？我很好奇你对未来的这种场景有何看法。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Do we enter a world where one power goes back to the restaurants and they can maybe choose who they want to give the reservation to based off of loyalty or average space? Or two, do we go into this world of bidding where everything becomes a bidding war between these agents? I'm curious your thoughts on kind of what that future looks like.
是的，我觉得你说得很对。我是说，这很有趣，因为有些东西会受到供应限制，比如受欢迎的餐厅座位，而有些东西会受到需求限制，比如想要明天飞往旧金山的人。我认为对于餐厅来说，如果他们能够获得完美的信息，他们会想要招待什么样的客人呢？正如你所说，是那些消费客单价最高、长期价值最大的客人，也就是多次光顾的客人。此外，他们还想确保尽可能接近100%的上座率。所以，这实际上是一个更复杂的计算。我不太清楚他们会怎么做，但我相信，相比依赖于终端消费者的摩擦和动机来充当防范DDoS攻击的手段，独有的供应将变得越来越重要。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah, I think you're super right. I mean, very interesting because I think there'll be things that are supply constrained, like hot restaurant tables, things that are demand constrained, like people that want to fly to SF tomorrow. I think for restaurants, if you think about with perfect information, who do they want? To your point, it's the highest AOV, highest LTV, which means AOV over multiple visits. Plus, they actually want to ensure that they're at, you know, near 100 percent capacity as much as possible. So that's actually a more sophisticated calculation. And I don't quite know how they're going to do it, but I'm sure that proprietary supply is going to become more and more important, you know, versus relying on kind of friction and motivation from the end consumer to act as something that sort of prevents this DDoS.
我认为供应受限的商业方面将会非常有趣。而需求受限的则会完全不同，几乎像是一次团购体验：一群买家愿意购买某种产品、服务或体验，然后供应方——可能满足这一需求的商家——前来竞价，看谁能以最佳体验，或可能最低价格，来满足需求。我们一直都有这种需求的聚合，但从未真正以同样的方式实现供应的聚合，特别是在拍卖系统中，这样做是为了让消费者获益。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So I think supply constrained sort of aspects of commerce will be really interesting. And then demand constrained will be completely different, you know, where you almost have a group buying experience where you have a set of buyers that are willing to buy a product or a service or an experience. And then you have the supply side, the merchants that could potentially fulfill that need come and, you know, bid to see who can do it, the best experience, maybe at the lowest price. So we've always had this kind of aggregation of demand, but we've never really had aggregation of supply in the same way, especially not in an auction system to benefit the consumer.
我觉得这真的很有趣。在亚马逊和Shopify的关系中，我认为亚马逊可能正确地下注，他们不想被中间化，不仅是因为不想失去广告收入，还因为冲动购物。我很好奇，这些代理本身是否会在某种程度上成为冲动购物者，因为我认为主动性意味着这些代理会尝试做出让人愉悦的猜测。而且，你知道，还有什么比惊喜或礼物更让人愉悦的呢？ 所以我猜，我们将看到的一种非常有趣的动态是，这些代理并不是他们客户的完美反映。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So I think that's really interesting. You know, in the Amazon Shopify thing, I think that the Amazon, Amazon probably is rightly taking the bet that they don't want to be disintermediated and that they'll lose not just advertising revenue, but impulse shopping. I'm kind of curious to know if the agents themselves will be impulse shoppers to some extent, because I think the point around proactivity means the agents are going to try to make delightful guesses. And, you know, what is more delightful than a surprise or a gift? So I'm guessing that one of the really interesting sort of dynamics we're going to play out is that these agents are not perfect reflections of their principles.
他们并不是完全理性的。他们会以全新的方式展现出部分理性和非理性。我不认为市场营销、冲动消费和广告这些事情会变得无关紧要。我只是觉得这些东西需要彻底改变。我认为这也开启了一个全新的对话，就是在这个充满自主性的商业空间中，推荐引擎究竟该是什么样的。因为人工智能和大语言模型似乎已经打破了互联网在高质量搜索方面的局限。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
They're not perfectly rational. They're going to be new rational and non-rational in completely new ways. And I don't know that things like marketing, things like impulse purchases, things like advertising won't matter. I just think they need to be transformed. Totally. And I think that opens up a whole new conversation as well, which is what is the recommendation engine of this agentic commerce space actually look like? Yeah, because AI and LLMs feels like it's kind of broke the Internet in terms of quality search.
但如果你使用一个代理，你说“嘿，帮我买点白袜子”，市场上大约有2万种不同类型的白袜子。它可能会给你发送一些信息，但实际上并不知道你到底喜欢哪种白袜子。所以我认为这将会非常有趣。我觉得Muse在这方面可能已经有了一个开端。此外，扎克（Zuck）的整个理论是，攻击所有商业领域，他们有你的Instagram数据，他们有你的Facebook数据。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
But then if you use an agent and you say, hey, buy me some white socks, there's like 20,000 different types of white socks out there. And it's going to send you it doesn't actually know what exact type of white socks you prefer. Yeah. And so I think it'll be really interesting. I think Muse has probably a head start on this. And, you know, this is whole Zuck's whole thesis of attacks on all commerce, where they have your Instagram data, they have your Facebook data.
所以他们可能会更好地理解你真正的喜好。不过，在商业世界中，看看这个推荐层会是什么样子，可能会很有趣。我觉得这对长尾产品来说可能会非常有趣。比如说，你想买白袜子，你可以去亚马逊上买，但是也许我的助手会建议我：“嘿，我在Etsy上找到了一位很棒的人，她可以为你手织袜子。”对，就像在内布拉斯加的奶奶，她编织的白袜子特别棒。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
So they probably have a little better understanding of what you actually prefer. But it'll be really interesting to see what this recommendation layer looks like in this world of commerce. Well, I think it could be fun for the long tail, you know, because you can imagine to your white socks example, like I could go to Amazon and get white socks, you know, but maybe my agent comes back and says, hey, I found someone awesome on Etsy that can knit you the socks, you know? Right, right, right. Like Grandma in Nebraska, and she just knits these amazing white socks.
这需要三周时间。你愿意吗？我说，好啊，我愿意。听起来很有趣。所以我在想，这是否会带来更多的惊喜，因为它可以全面地检查所有选项并完美地根据你的需求调整这些东西，而没有不良动机。对吧。我会很喜欢这样的。我觉得这会很有趣。它肯定会为今天单调的购物生活增添一些色彩。没错。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
It's going to take three weeks. Are you down? I'm like, sure, I'm down. That sounds interesting. So I kind of wonder if it brings more serendipity in, because, of course, you know, it can examine all the options and perfectly tailor these things to you with no adverse incentives. Right. I would love that. I think that'd be so fun. It would definitely add a little flavor to the mundane life of shopping today. Exactly.
从我的角度来看，挑选袜子并不是一件有趣的事情。所以，伙计，你可以想象一个更未来的世界，在这个世界里它开始在现实中催化一切。或许，奶奶不再是亲手编织白色袜子并在Etsy上出售，而是让代理人联系奶奶，问她是否愿意这样做。我觉得，这就是代理人与代理人互动的场景变得非常有趣之处。他们都代表他们的人类行事，有的提供产品、服务、知识，有的则是为了赚钱。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Mundane, from my point of view, as someone who, you know, doesn't take joy in sock shopping. Well, dude, and look, you can even imagine a world to get a little more futuristic where it starts to now catalyze things in the real world. So maybe instead of grandma who knits white socks and sells them on Etsy, you know, maybe it messages the agent of a grandma and says, hey, would you be up for doing this? So I think this is where the kind of agent-to-agent spaces get really interesting, where they're all acting on behalf of their humans, you know, some to provide products, services, knowledge, and some to make money.
也许存在一种更有活力、更高频率、更有趣的“次级经济”，比我们今天的经济更加丰富多彩。我在想象，这样的场景：在内布拉斯加的一个奶奶收到一条短信，说：“嘿，有个住在旧金山的人想让您帮他织白色袜子。”为什么不呢？你愿意做吗？为什么不呢？是啊，这很棒啊。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
And, you know, maybe there's this sort of secondary economy that's much more dynamic, much more high frequency, and just much more interesting than the one we have today. I'm just imagining now a grandma in Nebraska receiving a text message saying, hey, this guy in SF wants you to knit white socks for him. Why not? You want to do it? Why not? Yeah. Yeah. Why not? That'd be awesome.
是的，所以我其实很有希望。这种做法设置了正确的激励机制，因为如果代理们做了正确的事情，他们会根据产品质量选择优秀的产品，而不是依赖最好的营销或最有名的品牌。而且，如果他们是基于品牌选择，至少是经过用户明确同意的。比如，我只是喜欢耐克，所以选择耐克，而不是因为营销导致某种认知失调，结果让消费者做了对自己不利的选择。这为真正与消费者利益一致的互联网打开了大门，而我认为我们已经很长时间没有这样的互联网了。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Yeah. So I'm actually very hopeful. You know, it also, it sort of sets the incentives in the right way because if the agents are doing the right thing, they're choosing great products based on product quality, and they can assess product quality for themselves rather than, you know, the thing that has the best marketing or the best brand. And by the way, if they are choosing on a brand basis, it's at least with the explicit sign-off of their user. Like, I just want to have Nikes because I love Nikes, not because, you know, there's sort of this cognitive dissonance that's happening in the marketing and the consumer's actually doing something that's not optimal for themselves. Right. It opens the door to a truly consumer-aligned internet, which I think we have been lacking for quite some time.
我同意，你说得对。我们之前谈到了代理的经济情况。在我查看过的122个代理中，我亲自测试了26个。其中，122个中有65个是需要付费的。这很有趣，其中35个是完全付费的，有30个是采用免费加付费的模式，也就是达到一定限制后就需要付费。只有13个是完全免费的。当有Muse和Instinct这两个主导市场的免费选项时，还有OpenAI据说可能会在下周发布一些很酷的东西，谁知道呢？
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
I agree, man. We touched on the economics of the agents. Of the 122 that I have looked through, so I've personally tested 26 of them. Okay. Of the 122, 65 are paid. Interesting. 35 of them are fully paid. 30 are a freemium model. So once you hit a limit, then you have to pay. Only 13 of them are actually free. When you have Muse and Instinct that are both free, that are also the dominant ones, and then you have OpenAI that supposedly is going to be releasing something cool maybe next week. Who knows?
嗯嗯。那么，一家专注于长尾市场的初创公司到底该如何赢得这一领域呢？而且大公司都免费提供服务，他们为什么还要收费呢？这确实是个巨大的挑战。根据我们的估算，以一种非常有野心的方式来实现这一点，每位用户每天大约需要20美元的成本。对一家初创公司来说，每年可能需要数亿美元。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Mm-hmm. How does a long-tail startup actually win this space? And why are they charging money when the big dogs are giving it to you for free? Man, it's going to be really challenging. You know, by our estimate, it's costing something like $20 per user per day to do this in a really ambitious way. You know, potentially hundreds of millions a year for a startup.
我认为，我们应该押注于两个积极的趋势：第一，浏览器的使用成本应该会降低，并且非常迅速地呈指数下降。如果你是一个正在筹集资金的初创公司，并且押注于这种情况将在六个月内发生，那可能有点冒险。但我们已经看到，代币价格和新兴技术的成本都大幅下降。因此，我认为浏览器的使用变得足够便宜，以至于更多产品可以免费提供这种服务是完全可能的。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
I mean, I think the two positive trends to bet on are that browser use should be deflationary, get exponentially cheaper very rapidly. Now, if you're a startup that is raising today, that's betting on that happening in six months, maybe it's a little bit of a game of chicken. But we have seen kind of token prices depress dramatically and sort of emerging capabilities depress, so the price of them. So I think it's very possible that browser use gets cheap enough that more products can offer this for free.
我想说，反过来我不太喜欢把顾客补贴当作主要的价值主张。我希望能看到一个价格为每月1000美元，且消费者因为非常感兴趣而愿意支付的产品。毕竟，人们每月在很多非必需品上花费1000美元。有哪些产品能让人们愿意为它支付这样的价格呢？这样的产品既能极好地符合市场需求，又能在一定程度上降低成本。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
I guess the flip, though, is that I don't love the idea of, you know, a customer subsidy being the primary value prop. So I'd love to see the agent that costs $1,000 a month that the consumer is so excited about that they're willing to pay. Like, people spend $1,000 a month on a lot of different things that are, you know, not necessarily necessities. They're sort of desires. So what is the agent that is exciting enough that you're willing to pay that kind of price for it? And then that agent will benefit from both extreme market fit as well as sort of deflating costs.
好的，好吧。我觉得这会很有趣，非常有趣。感谢来自Assistant Bench的David参与，希望大家都能关注他的工作。谢谢你加入我们。我们会经常这样做。我觉得我们可以每周都做这个，因为每天都有新鲜事发生。所以请在X平台上关注他，也关注我。我们会一起在X社区中保持同步，互相学习。祝你和你的团队每天愉快。感谢，同样祝福你。这很有意思。好的，兄弟，谢谢你。太棒了。
▶ 英文原文 ⏱
Right, right. I think it will be interesting to see. Super interesting. Well, David from Assistant Bench, make sure everybody checks it out. Thank you so much for joining us. We're going to do this frequently. I mean, I feel like we could do this every week, dude, like things are happening every single day. So please follow him on X. Follow me as well. We'll all keep up to speed and sort of learn together in the X community. And sort of happy day to you and your agents. Appreciate it. Same to you. This was fun. All right, brother. Thank you. Awesome.