Beware of "Lobster" Repeating the Old Mistakes of the Metaverse

Chen Xiachang

From the Metaverse to NFTs, and then to blockchain, concepts in cutting-edge technology are emerging one after another. The latest is the AI intelligent agent “Lobster.” In less than a month, this “Lobster” has broken out of the tech enthusiast circle, sparking nationwide discussion, capital pursuit, market speculation, and even leading to a series of chaotic phenomena such as paid customization, training scams, and concept stock hype. Under the heat, practitioners and investors need to stay alert: beware of “Lobster” repeating the old path of the Metaverse, and do not let technological innovation become a carnival for capital and traffic.

Looking back at the recent Metaverse craze, its development trajectory can be seen as a typical concept bubble history. At that time, the Metaverse was packaged as the next-generation internet’s ultimate form, with grand narratives everywhere, speculative products like virtual land and NFTs emerging endlessly, AR/VR hardware dazzling, capital flocking in, and companies rushing to deploy. It was as if missing out on the Metaverse meant missing an era. Major social media platform Facebook even renamed itself Meta and invested over $60 billion over several years.

However, when the hype faded, hardware bottlenecks proved difficult to overcome, application scenarios were severely lacking, and business models failed to materialize. The once-hot trend quickly cooled, leaving behind numerous abandoned projects and trapped investors. Meta also announced significant layoffs and reduced related business budgets earlier this year, indirectly signaling an exit from the track. The so-called disruptive revolution ultimately turned into a superficial farce.

Today’s “Lobster” craze gives a familiar feeling.

As an open-source AI tool, “Lobster” was originally a niche product for tech enthusiasts to explore, with some experimental value but far from a mature stage capable of disrupting industries or replacing human labor. Yet, under the boost of traffic and capital, some exaggerated its utility, downplayed technical barriers, and created anxiety that “everyone needs it, falling behind if you don’t learn.” The market quickly bred speculative chaos: high-priced deployment services, paid training, trademark squatting, concept stock fluctuations—while few truly focus on technical development and scene refinement. Most just want to make quick money from the trend. Just like the Metaverse, which diverged from public demand, most ordinary people chasing “Lobster” do not have real needs; they are simply following the so-called dividends.

The bubble of the Metaverse has long proven that without genuine demand support, hype is just a castle in the air; without tangible value, concepts will ultimately vanish. Although “Lobster” and the Metaverse are in different tracks, they share the same “disease”: a severe mismatch between technological maturity and market expectations, with niche tools forcibly packaged as nationwide trends, industry deployment impatient and reckless, and speculation overshadowing pragmatic effort.

Technological innovation should be encouraged, and emerging concepts deserve tolerance, but hype and speculation that hijack innovation must not be tolerated. In facing the “Lobster” craze, market participants need to return to rationality, shed false fire, recognize the limitations and risks of technology, and focus on safety, stability, and practicality—deepening real application scenarios. The general public should also stay vigilant, avoid falling into paid scams and speculative fads, resist anxiety, and not become pawns in a game of musical chairs. Industry and policy should guide pragmatic development, prevent blind followings, avoid resource waste, and let technology serve the real needs.

The lessons of the Metaverse are still vivid, and the “Lobster” craze continues. Only by respecting technological laws, adhering to a pragmatic orientation, and rejecting hype and speculation can emerging technologies truly create value, rather than leading from mass enthusiasm to chaos and repeating the bubble burst cycle.

This column reflects only the author’s personal views.

（Editor: Guo Jiandong）

【Disclaimer】This article only represents the author’s personal opinions and has no relation to Hexun.com. Hexun.com remains neutral regarding the statements and opinions in this article and does not guarantee the accuracy, reliability, or completeness of the content. Readers are advised to use it as a reference and bear all responsibilities themselves. Email: news_center@staff.hexun.com