I guess I’m coming back to the
$TAO ecosystem.
Having worked in the
$TAO ecosystem for close to 2 years through Foundry & Yuma, and the last 6 months away building a core AI product, I think it’s time to come back.
This time as a subnet builder to build the “Mercor for computer-use agents”…..PROVIDED I can find a good incentive mechanism for this.
After having been in Bittensor for a long time, I always told myself that I wouldn’t build a subnet for the fuck of it, but build one if and only if there could be a true value unlock for my product.
We are not thinking of building a subnet because we can. We built a product first, and it just so happens that there is an avenue where Bittensor could help us build a better product.
Over the last 6 months I’ve been working on
@TryBrowzer
Initially it started as an agentic browser, but later I realized my goal wasn’t to add AI to a browser. It was to build a better, content-aware automation system for meaningful workflows.
Building automation systems is easy if you have good underlying models, and to get good underlying models you need good and relevant data.
Browzer has a functional product that’s being used by people & generates revenue.
Today we’re at $3,500 in MRR.
The last few days I’ve been brainstorming how we could tie the product with a subnet to (1) get better training data (2) increase our revenue (3) bring
$TAO to the limelight (4) increase
$TAO/alpha distribution.
While a lot of the details are in the works and I’m still figuring out the best incentive mechanism for this (everything so far has been experimentation), if anyone has ideas I’d love I chat.
I believe Bittensor’s economic system, combined with a robust incentive mechanism could help unlock and financially incentivize people to provide solid workflows to build better computer use agents by improving the base foundational model capabilities.
*THE CORE PROBLEM I’M TRYING TO ADDRESS*
If I used Comet or other Agentic browsers or any AI based automation system, I couldn’t automate the work that mattered because it had no data to do so.
The difference between coding agents vs computer-use agents is that coding agents had readily available context - codebases.
But computer use agents have nothing - other than browsing history. History never paints a full picture, you can only understand the user journey.
What never gets captured, but is super critical context is -
- how a user interacts within a website
- what info they fill in forms
- how they fill it
Computer use agents today are okay, but there’s a long way to go before they’re used for meaningful business process automation.
And that’s what Browzer tries to solve. We allow users to record their critical workflows and we capture a bunch of info (videos dom) and then use that context to automate any similar workflows.
But this is where the problem is - computer-use agents aren’t inherently great. We need more data to train and build better foundational computer-use capabilities.
A lot of frontier labs are looking for high quality labeled computer-use datasets.
And that’s something that’s not very easy…but, I believe, is an amazing use case where Bittensor can shine.
Would love your thoughts
@const_reborn @JosephJacks_ @badenglishtea @DreadBong0 @EvanMalanga @Old_Samster @CryptoZPunisher