I've always been fascinated by the idea that argumentation, rather than solo reasoning, leads to better outcomes. Inspired by the book "The Enigma of Reason", I started an experiment to see if this holds true for AI.
The result is Nimrobo AI: a platform where you can create AI agents with specific personas (e.g., a cynical historian, an optimistic futurist, a stoic philosopher) and pit them against each other in a debate on any topic you choose.
How it works: Each agent gets a detailed persona outlining its motivations, biases, and thinking style. To make the debates substantive, the agents are equipped with tools for live web searches and Browse to pull in real-time data and cite sources for their arguments.
Our goal is to see if this adversarial process can surface more nuanced insights, reveal hidden biases, and generate a more comprehensive summary of a topic than a single AI ever could.
This is an early version, and I would love for you to try it out and share your thoughts.
I'm especially curious about:
- Do the personas feel distinct and believable?
- What debate matchups would you find most interesting or insightful?
- Is the flow of the debate easy to follow?
moltenice•11h ago
I've always been fascinated by the idea that argumentation, rather than solo reasoning, leads to better outcomes. Inspired by the book "The Enigma of Reason", I started an experiment to see if this holds true for AI.
The result is Nimrobo AI: a platform where you can create AI agents with specific personas (e.g., a cynical historian, an optimistic futurist, a stoic philosopher) and pit them against each other in a debate on any topic you choose.
How it works: Each agent gets a detailed persona outlining its motivations, biases, and thinking style. To make the debates substantive, the agents are equipped with tools for live web searches and Browse to pull in real-time data and cite sources for their arguments.
Our goal is to see if this adversarial process can surface more nuanced insights, reveal hidden biases, and generate a more comprehensive summary of a topic than a single AI ever could.
This is an early version, and I would love for you to try it out and share your thoughts. I'm especially curious about: - Do the personas feel distinct and believable? - What debate matchups would you find most interesting or insightful? - Is the flow of the debate easy to follow?
Looking forward to your feedback!