I do think some of features in their harness seem interesting (workers in separate worktrees at once), recovery from crashes seem interesting.
Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2
41–50 of 265 posts
Re: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2
#42Meta is offering a 10x discount on input ($0.10 vs. $1.25/Mtok) and 20x discount on output ($0.20 vs. $4.25/Mtok) if you opt in to let them train on your data.
Re: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2
#43Last I heard, everyone at Meta was using Claude Code. Any insiders know how Muse Code is doing internally?
So were Microsoft employees until they got forced to use copilot. Everyone seems to think MS got rid of Claude Code due to cost but it had nothing to do with cost. Employees weren’t even using copilot. Can’t make a product better if you don’t use it. Meta should be the same. Use your own product.
Re: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2
#44Meta is offering a 10x discount on input ($0.10 vs. $1.25/Mtok) and 20x discount on output ($0.20 vs. $4.25/Mtok) if you opt in to let them train on your data. https://developer.meta.com/ai/models/muse-spark/
I think that's a fair offering tbh
Re: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2
#45Last I heard, everyone at Meta was using Claude Code. Any insiders know how Muse Code is doing internally?
If there were, do you believe it would be in their interest to answer this publicly?
> > Any insiders know how Muse Code is doing internally?
> If there were, do you believe it would be in their interest to answer this publicly?
If it were being adopted like gangbusters in their organization, sure!
So... the fact that nobody is volunteering the information is probably a valid signal of how things are actually going...
Re: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2
#46If you got the $20 in free credits from Meta for signing up when muse-spark-1.1 was release, please note that there's now small print stating "While using free credits your content may be used for product improvement" which was not present at muse-spark-1.1 launch when the credits were given out. If you don't mind Meta retaining your data, the "Contributor" pricing is deepseek-v4-flash-level of low, roughly 1/10th no…
The API costs for the version of their model that feeds things back to meta is also drastically lower.
Re: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2
#47It seems like one day, Google or Meta might produce a coding model worth discussing. That day is not today.
Re: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2
#48Somewhat surprised that Meta with all their resources couldn’t make a model that matches Composer on any frontier. All the Sparks are dominated by some other model everywhere along the frontier. Nothing fancy here since Llama defined the open model. The use traces must be crucial to functionality which is why they’re keeping prices so low.
They rebooted less than one year ago so this is decent progress. Obviously users don't care about progress though.
Re: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2
#49Meta is offering a 10x discount on input ($0.10 vs. $1.25/Mtok) and 20x discount on output ($0.20 vs. $4.25/Mtok) if you opt in to let them train on your data. https://developer.meta.com/ai/models/muse-spark/
I think it's limited to US or at least EU is excluded.
Re: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2
#50They chose to compare against Open AI’s mid tier model Terra instead of Sol and still lost some benchmark against it. They left Opus in and got beat in all but one benchmark. Nothing wrong with trying to improve, but why the marketing games? Instead of trying to say in the post you’re “closer” to frontier, first set a clear goal to beat the Chinese labs on price or performance and demonstrate it convincingly. Then wh…
We can throw benchmarks in the bin by now. Each one I've seen is heavily biased and skewed. It holds very little reliable data points (unfortunately)