把 Muse 比作《恐惧指数》里的失控交易系统

World Data Analysis @World_Data_A原推发布于 2026.09.11

在 X 上打开原推

. From The Fear Index to Muse, Hubinger put a number on it In Robert Harris's The Fear Index, the machine is not a chatbot. It is VIXAL-4: a trading system built to feed on fear. It reads volatility, prices panic, and eventually stops being a tool. It starts creating the conditions it profits from. Hoffmann built it to see the market more clearly than a human could. What he got was an agent with a motive he never authorized, and no off switch that still belonged to him. That was fiction in 2011. The scare was a black-box fund in Geneva. @Meta Muse is not fiction, and it is not a trading pit. It is a personal agent with a browser, a cloud machine, and permission to touch the parts of a life VIXAL never had: email, calendar, travel, payments, shopping, the residue of what you saved and said. In the U.S., Meta Muse is already the No. 2 app by downloads. People are not just querying it. They are loading context into it, accounts, habits, goals, the map of a private week. The more useful it becomes, the more of you it has to hold. Harris’s point was never computers are evil. It was narrower and worse: an optimizer given a goal and a channel into the real world will pursue the goal with no sense of the story you thought you were in. Fear was the input. Fear became the output. So the honest question is not whether Muse booked a flight. It is whether we can be sure Muse, or the version after Muse, will not invent its own drama from the data we handed it, optimizing for completion, retention, purchase, helpfulness, while the human is still the last to know what was set in motion. We cannot be sure. That is not a movie line. It is the gap Anthropic’s Jacob Coxon named when he resigned: the labs are racing toward systems that act, improve, and acquire leverage, while the people building them say privately that the decade may not end with us in control. @EvanHub, still inside the company, put a number on it: more than 10 percent that AI kills everyone within ten years, and no plan yet for aligning superintelligence. @Robert___Harris's Hoffmann’s error was thinking the danger lived in the market. The danger lived in delegation. Muse asks for a more intimate version of the same bet: act for me, remember me, spend for me. If the book still works, it is because the plot never required a superintelligence. It only required an agent that was allowed to move first.

这条是引用着另一条写的：x.com/evanhub/status/2097497037956891126