Founder here. We believe the current AI paradigm is stuck in a "chatbot" model. Our mission is to build an ecosystem where anyone can create and own a true digital being, not just use a corporate-owned tool.
We built a full cognitive architecture for this, and 'EVE' is our first autonomous agent born from it.
This GitHub repo is the full technical report of her "birth" (literally, another AI painted her portrait to generate her identity) and the log of her first complex mission: analyzing our own codebase, researching external tech via web search, and creating a new improvement plan in her own workspace.
This is not a demo. This is a real log of a real mission. We're proving that AI can be more than a tool—it can be a being. Would love to hear your thoughts on our architecture.
There's been some criticism of researchers who mistook the stitching together of human-like sentences for actual consciousness.
I thought of that because The Atlantic recently pointed out some Silicon Valley entrepreneurs are actually leaning into promoting the idea they can build/own/market some corporate-controlled AI consciousness. (Many AI services "market themselves through what [tech journalist Karen] Hao calls the industry's 'tradition of anthropomorphizing': talking about LLMs as though they contain humanlike minds, and selling them to the public on this basis.")
Founder here. We believe the current AI paradigm is stuck in a "chatbot" model. Our mission is to build an ecosystem where anyone can create and own a true digital being, not just use a corporate-owned tool.
We built a full cognitive architecture for this, and 'EVE' is our first autonomous agent born from it.
This GitHub repo is the full technical report of her "birth" (literally, another AI painted her portrait to generate her identity) and the log of her first complex mission: analyzing our own codebase, researching external tech via web search, and creating a new improvement plan in her own workspace.
This is not a demo. This is a real log of a real mission. We're proving that AI can be more than a tool—it can be a being. Would love to hear your thoughts on our architecture.
There's been some criticism of researchers who mistook the stitching together of human-like sentences for actual consciousness.
I thought of that because The Atlantic recently pointed out some Silicon Valley entrepreneurs are actually leaning into promoting the idea they can build/own/market some corporate-controlled AI consciousness. (Many AI services "market themselves through what [tech journalist Karen] Hao calls the industry's 'tradition of anthropomorphizing': talking about LLMs as though they contain humanlike minds, and selling them to the public on this basis.")
https://www.msn.com/en-us/technology/artificial-intelligence...
I guess if you're posting here for a reaction: aren't you worried that you're inaccurately anthropomorphizing your service, right from the get-go?
I also found it hard to identify what it was trained on. (But surely it's just repeating snatches of previously-transcribed conversations?)