|
|
|
|
|
|
by aogaili
18 days ago
|
|
|
A lot of shaming and negative comments. Mainly people annoyed that this is created with LLM usage. Comments like, the author is grandiose, he/she is delusional, the repo was committed yesterday etc. It seems to be a lot of folks in the community are just lethargic to anything created by LLMs. But regarding the idea itself, the author basically abstracted and use MCP as the server/interface. I worked a bit on the memory issue of agents, and I do understand the pain point. So I just looked at the article as a source of aspiration, another interesting idea etc..before LLMs, the author could have just said in a blog, oh why not have a universal protocol for memory? But now the author can actually do it, try it, share it with others, and for one see this as a progress, it might inspire other people. |
|
|
I dislike "overpromise and underdeliver". LLMs can of course be used for other things, but for the type of person who overpromises and underdelivers, LLMs seem to be particularly attractive, and act as a force-multiplier.
> before LLMs, the author could have just said in a blog, oh why not have a universal protocol for memory?
a blog post would at least have been honest. "here's an idea I had, what do you think?"
likewise, a blog post plus a link to a GitHub repo containing a prototype would have been fine, as long as the prototype is clearly labeled as such. "here's an idea I had, plus a sketch of how a concrete implementation might work, what do you think?"
what LLMs enable is overpromise-and-underdeliver-as-a-service. this idea could have been a blog post, or a simple prototype, but what we get instead is a fancy-looking website, with its own domain, for this half-baked idea.
if you take the polished website at face value, you would be misled into thinking that the idea itself is also polished. hence the comments exercising some critical thinking and pointing out that this "universal protocol"...doesn't actually have any real-world usage, anywhere in the universe.