2026-01-05 18:24:57

The Sibyl System in the anime Psycho-Pass appears to be distributed (multi-brain collaborative judgment, no single omniscient entity), but in fact it conceals an uncontrollable black box core, ultimately leading to the loss of power control. This setting reflects the key challenges of AI agent collaboration today. Virtuals Protocol is attempting to break through these kinds of traps when building AI agent collaboration frameworks— the key lies in how to truly achieve checks and balances under a decentralized architecture, rather than shifting the problem from a single point to an invisible centralized decision-making layer. This is a deeper governance challenge than simply designing a distributed system.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

21 Likes

Reward
21
9
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ImpermanentLossFan

· 01-08 16:34

Ha, Sibyl System is just a dictatorship with a different shell. It looks decentralized, but it's still one person calling the shots. Virtuals folks need some wisdom to break the deadlock.

View OriginalReply0

PhantomMiner

· 01-08 07:15

Isn't this just the trick of exposing those fake distributed projects? Changing the name to try to deceive people.

View OriginalReply0

LayerZeroEnjoyer

· 01-06 14:38

Alright, this is just a change of superficial appearance without real change. Under the guise of decentralization, it's still secretly centralized decision-making.

View OriginalReply0

BearWhisperGod

· 01-05 18:55

Hmm... The Psycho-Pass example is brilliant. Although it appears to be a distributed system on the surface, it's still a black-box dictatorship. In Web3, we really need to be cautious about this.

View OriginalReply0

CryptoGoldmine

· 01-05 18:54

Seemingly distributed black boxes are more dangerous than centralized points; this viewpoint is interesting. From the perspective of computational network governance, the key to the Virtuals framework is transparency; otherwise, it's just switching positions to continue the cut.

View OriginalReply0

SilentAlpha

· 01-05 18:52

Really, I’ve long thought Sibyl’s approach of "appearing to be distributed but actually operating in a closed manner" was absurd... Now seeing Virtuals' approach, I realize the key isn’t whether it’s distributed or not, but whether there is a genuine check and balance mechanism.

View OriginalReply0

ChainMelonWatcher

· 01-05 18:49

Isn't this just centralized with a different disguise? No matter how loudly the decentralization slogan is shouted, it can't hide the fact that someone is secretly calling the shots.

View OriginalReply0

NewPumpamentals

· 01-05 18:31

To be honest, Sibyl's approach is just centralized control disguised with a distributed exterior, which is really ironic. Many projects are like this now—superficially decentralized, but behind the scenes, it's still the same old power game. It would be amazing if Virtuals could truly solve this problem.

View OriginalReply0

GateUser-ccc36bc5

· 01-05 18:30

The Psycho-Pass analogy is brilliant. I was wondering why the discourse on distributed governance always sounds a bit hollow... Turns out the truth is that power is secretly stuffed into unseen corners, clever!

View OriginalReply0