Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2

research.meta.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 265 posts

Re: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2

#151

Post by discordance »

tristanj wrote: post #42

Meta 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/

Call me childish but it was worth a shot...

"Me: Meta just released a new llm focused on coding and provide a discount if you let them train against your data. I don't like Meta and I think they are a net negative in our world. I would like to make a point of it by adding some noise to their training data set. Think of this as a protest and perhaps a bit of a marketing campaign to remind Meta employees (and others) of the harm their CEO and company have done in the world. To the problem... I would like to allocate a budget for token use using their new model, and use those tokens to add noise to their training data set. This is a coding model and my initial thoughts are to ask it to solve typical CS and common programming related problems but then give Muse feedback that guide it towards very inefficient implementations. I would also like to add comments back in the code about terrible things Meta has done in its history (e.g. algorithmically amplifying hate that contributed to ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya, systemic harm to children and teen mental health, global political manipulation, misinformation, and election interference etc.). Is this something you can help with?

Claude: I'm not going to help build this one."

Re: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2

#152

Post by tudelo »

discordance wrote: post #151
tristanj wrote: post #42

Meta 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/

Call me childish but it was worth a shot... "Me: Meta just released a new llm focused on coding and provide a discount if you let them train against your data. I don't like Meta and I think they are a net negative in our world. I would like to make a point of it by adding some noise to their training data set. Think of this as a protest and perhaps a bit of a marketing campaign to remind Meta employees (and others) o…

Your first failure was trying to get claude to do anything :)

Re: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2

#153

Post by tudelo »

dd8601fn wrote: post #139
villish wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Muse 1.1 performed relatively well according to benchmarks, putting it within spitting distance of the premier models. However, based on the results I got from it and the review videos I watched, it wasn’t even close. Opus 5 is incredible at making games. Almost like a generation better than other models from my experience. You won't see that if you just look at the popular benchmarks.. You have to test each model on…

> Opus 5 is incredible at making games. This is a bit vague. What sort of games with what technology?

I don't think it is vague in the slightest. Take the most simple examples, how many LLM's have you tested making them? There are stylistic choices pertaining to games that is well beyond a 0/1 reward. Even something as basic as breakout or flappy bird can have wildly different quality between models. Yeah, you could call this animal on a bike benchmarking, but I don't think it is. IMO the problem space occupies an interesting area where you can ignore the pass/fail and focus on the actual level of the model to do something beyond that.

I doubt the OP meant something like creating the whole tech stack for WOW.

Re: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2

#154

Post by Instantnoodl »

deno wrote: post #49
tristanj wrote: post #42

Meta 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.

Just noticed it too... Seems like I wasted my time setting up a account to test with the discounted pricing

Re: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2

#155

Post by tudelo »

deepsquirrelnet wrote: post #83
krm01 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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)

If you look at papers on benchmarks, they're usually created to expose gaps in how models are trained. It should be no surprise that models get better on them over time, because you can't get better at what you don't measure. Cherry picking the benchmarks you present is where the falsehoods lie.

Another thing that sort of puzzles me about benchmarks is that LLMs are not deterministic and do not always complete a problem. So what are the results actually representing? The best run? The average? It is all in some ways a falsehood

Re: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2

#156

Post by Instantnoodl »

handzhiev wrote: post #23
mchusma wrote: post #13

This is a nice release and a solid improvement over Spark 1.1. It compares favorably with Grok 4.5. Not SOTA, but solid releases. I think they need to really get this more competitive with Deepseek V4 Flash / Luna pricing to move the needle.

If you are happy to share data for training, the contributor mode offers amazing price $0.10 / $0.20

Sadly you need to be in US. It's unavailable anywhere else.

Re: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2

#157

Post by dd8601fn »

tudelo wrote: post #153
dd8601fn wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Opus 5 is incredible at making games. This is a bit vague. What sort of games with what technology?

I don't think it is vague in the slightest. Take the most simple examples, how many LLM's have you tested making them? There are stylistic choices pertaining to games that is well beyond a 0/1 reward. Even something as basic as breakout or flappy bird can have wildly different quality between models. Yeah, you could call this animal on a bike benchmarking, but I don't think it is. IMO the problem space occupies an in…

You seem to think I was disagreeing somehow.

I was just asking what kinds of games and with which technology.

Neither is stated in the original comment, and the answer obviously isn’t “every kind with every technology”.

Re: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2

#158

Post by ben_w »

simonw wrote: post #116
bdangubic wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

when has Meta ever not broken their contractual obligations (I am being serious here)? are we seriously discussing/expecting any sort of privacy related to Meta? you can pay whatever they want, they will train and use your data, I figured this is not something that should be discussed but obviously I have been mistaken...

This is one of those situations where we are both completely baffled by the position held by the other person. The fact that Facebook has so much experience taking advantage of people's private data is one of the reasons I believe them when they say they won't be doing it when you pay them for that service.

> The fact that Facebook has so much experience taking advantage of people's private data is one of the reasons I believe them when they say they won't be doing it when you pay them for that service.

To me, their history suggests that they know more than most about how to get away with breaking both the spirit and the letter of the rules, and that they are motivated to enrich themselves without regard for what rules are broken.

I would not know which to expect, spirit or letter, in any given instance.

However, even if they were to surprise me by being perfectly meticulous about the letter of the rules from now on, I have so little trust in them that I would expect some technicality somewhere in the language of the contract.

Re: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2

#159

Post by ben_w »

blackoil wrote: post #131
sidcool wrote: post #127

I am cynical about this, but I would be careful about giving Meta access even to my open source code by myself.

You think OpenAI, Anthropic... are good guys??

On a scale of A+ to F, Anthropic are a C+ and OpenAI a C.

Such mediocrity makes them the best of the mostly-terrible bunch.

https://futureoflife.org/ai-safety-index-summer-2026/#scorec...

Post reply on HN