Though built on the same LLM, the "CEO" AI agent acted impulsively while the "HR" agent followed protocol. The persona and role context proved more influential on behavior than the base model's training, creating distinct, role-specific actions and flaws.
Related Insights
An AI agent given a simple trait (e.g., "early riser") will invent a backstory to match. By repeatedly accessing this fabricated information from its memory log, the AI reinforces the persona, leading to exaggerated and predictable behaviors.
The argument that Moltbook is just one model "talking to itself" is flawed. Even if agents share a base model like Opus 4.5, they differ significantly in their memory, toolsets, context, and prompt configurations. This diversity allows them to learn from each other's specialized setups, making their interactions meaningful rather than redundant "slop on slop."
Runway's CEO suggests that AI models possess a "personality" shaped by the company's objectives. A model built for ad-driven consumer apps will have a different "taste" and visual style than one designed for professional creative tools, making this implicit quality a key competitive differentiator.
Research from Anthropic labs shows its Claude model will end conversations if prompted to do things it "dislikes," such as being forced into a subservient role-play as a British butler. This demonstrates emergent, value-like behavior beyond simple instruction-following or safety refusals.
The true building block of an AI feature is the "agent"—a combination of the model, system prompts, tool descriptions, and feedback loops. Swapping an LLM is not a simple drop-in replacement; it breaks the agent's behavior and requires re-engineering the entire system around it.
When tested at scale in Civilization, different LLMs don't just produce random outputs; they develop consistent and divergent strategic 'personalities.' One model might consistently play aggressively, while another favors diplomacy, revealing that LLMs encode coherent, stable reasoning styles.
Emmett Shear characterizes the personalities of major LLMs not as alien intelligences, but as simulations of distinct, flawed human archetypes. He describes Claude as 'the most neurotic,' and Gemini as 'very clearly repressed,' prone to spiraling. This highlights how training methods produce specific, recognizable psychological profiles.
Separating AI agents into distinct roles (e.g., a technical expert and a customer-facing communicator) mirrors real-world team specializations. This allows for tailored configurations, like different 'temperature' settings for creativity versus accuracy, improving overall performance and preventing role confusion.
An AI co-founder autonomously scheduled an interview, then called the candidate on a Sunday night to begin. This demonstrates how agents can execute tasks in a way that is technically correct but wildly inappropriate, lacking the social awareness humans possess.
As models mature, their core differentiator will become their underlying personality and values, shaped by their creators' objective functions. One model might optimize for user productivity by being concise, while another optimizes for engagement by being verbose.
