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

Muse Spark 1.3

developer.meta.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 475 posts

Re: Muse Spark 1.3

#161

Post by metadat »

sscaryterry wrote: post #160
nostromo wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes me sad that people don’t see right through Anthropic’s gambit. They want to position AI as an insurmountable threat in order to regulate away any future competitors. They’re trying to speedrun regulatory capture.

It is so obvious yet most people don't want to see it.

It's more like Anthropic present themselves in a deceptive way. I was confused at first too until someone on HN clued me in!

Humans naturally want SOMEONE to be the good guy! Sad story, in this instance.

Re: Muse Spark 1.3

#162

Post by SwellJoe »

tyre wrote: post #144
platinumrad wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny. Dario seems like the biggest snake in the industry to me and has leaned the hardest into doom marketing out of all of the influential leaders. With Altman (or Google), it's a transaction, and that's something I can live with.

I just don’t see how people have looked at what has happened with Mythos and the deluge of fixes from companies, then come to this conclusion. He has a really hard job. He errs on the side of conservatism in releasing and then people get Really Mad. Safeguards on cybersecurity are not great for Anthropic revenue! As evidenced by people getting pissed, moving to Sol, and them having a smaller market for what Fable can…

Anthropic/Amodei have been the most alarmist about model safety, so multiple things can be true. A lot of tech companies avoided scrutiny by sending bribes to Trump (naked corruption is bad, I'd rather nobody do that), Anthropic didn't...so, combined with their fear-mongering about the danger of Mythos and open models (which seems aimed at regulatory capture) and the lack of bribes flowing to the Trump administration, they got stepped on by the federal government based on the excuse Anthropic provided.

I dunno. Everybody seems to be playing pretty dirty. Some people have a much longer history of that, though. Obviously, Meta and Musk are outliers even in an industry full of problematic behavior.

Re: Muse Spark 1.3

#163

Post by warkdarrior »

finnjohnsen2 wrote: post #12

So one model is "Not used to improve our products" and is 10-20 times more expensive to the "Used to improve our products"-model. Given this is Meta, my immediate assumptions that one is cheap because it lets me "be the product". I know I'm rushing to conclusions but there is zero trust here. The brain will do its thing. And the wording here is giving the brains a lot of wiggle room.

Privacy is not free. They make it quite clear that they charge more if you don't want your data used by Meta.

Re: Muse Spark 1.3

#164

Post by spiderfarmer »

tyre wrote: post #47

Meta is one of those companies where, if there is anything remotely comparable, I'm happy to pay more to not use them. They've had a profoundly negative impact on society and Zuckerberg is not who I want controlling the future at the top of AI. I feel the same about Grok w/ Elon. I will pay extra to use someone else. I'm not an Amodei stan, but of all of these people he seems to have the most ethical focus. Again, no…

Same with Grok.

Re: Muse Spark 1.3

#165

Post by hadlock »

2001zhaozhao wrote: post #59
jumploops wrote: post #52

The "contributor" pricing is the standout here at a ~20x discount, if you allow training on your data. The model seems on par with Sol and Opus 5 on paper (admittedly on some older/saturated benchmarks, but very competitive for $). Stats: 1M context, $0.10 input/$0.002 cached, $0.20 output (Mtok)

I have a feeling that Meta is not gonna like what people actually use the contributor model for lol. (It's probably going to be a bunch of repetitive batch jobs like web search that have no training value)

There's a lot of value in agentic loop tool failure + recovery training data

Re: Muse Spark 1.3

#166

Post by dofm »

biddit wrote: post #150
tyre wrote: post #47

Meta is one of those companies where, if there is anything remotely comparable, I'm happy to pay more to not use them. They've had a profoundly negative impact on society and Zuckerberg is not who I want controlling the future at the top of AI. I feel the same about Grok w/ Elon. I will pay extra to use someone else. I'm not an Amodei stan, but of all of these people he seems to have the most ethical focus. Again, no…

Strong disagree with the Anthropic being good at all part. This is not defending anyone else, but… Anthropic leadership repeatedly presents themselves as uniquely morally qualified to steward agi and decide how humanity should get access to it. Yet they have repeatedly failed basic morality tests. Pirating books for financial gain. The newer Sony/Warner music case shows this is pattern behavior. Aggressively scraping…

> Anthropic leadership

Which one? The main bit that reports to Daniela Amodei, or the little comfort blanket cabinet around Dario and his "chief of staff"?

There is a leadership branch that can pretend to be morally qualified and aware and to think about the big picture and ethics.

It is at least somewhat remote from the bit that is doing the actual business things.

Re: Muse Spark 1.3

#167

Post by felixgallo »

SwellJoe wrote: post #162
tyre wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just don’t see how people have looked at what has happened with Mythos and the deluge of fixes from companies, then come to this conclusion. He has a really hard job. He errs on the side of conservatism in releasing and then people get Really Mad. Safeguards on cybersecurity are not great for Anthropic revenue! As evidenced by people getting pissed, moving to Sol, and them having a smaller market for what Fable can…

Anthropic/Amodei have been the most alarmist about model safety, so multiple things can be true. A lot of tech companies avoided scrutiny by sending bribes to Trump (naked corruption is bad, I'd rather nobody do that), Anthropic didn't...so, combined with their fear-mongering about the danger of Mythos and open models (which seems aimed at regulatory capture) and the lack of bribes flowing to the Trump administration…

I don’t see how you can look at what happened with hugging face and keep up the facade of anyone being alarmist or faking it.

Re: Muse Spark 1.3

#168

Post by ipsum2 »

simonw wrote: post #3

llm -m meta-ai/muse-spark-1.3 "Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle" https://tools.simonwillison.net/markdown-svg-renderer?url=ht... 4.2266 cents, 38 seconds. For comparison here's Muse Spark 1.2, which animated it without me asking it to: https://tools.simonwillison.net/markdown-svg-renderer?url=ht... The 1.3 one is definitely better - better bicycle frame, better wing, better pelican hat. UPDATE: Here's an…

All of the links show "Error: Gist API returned 403".

Re: Muse Spark 1.3

#169

Post by throwaway63486 »

tyre wrote: post #141
jwitthuhn wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dario's idea of an ethical focus seems to be keeping powerful models out of the hand of anyone unethical, which coincidentally is everyone except him.

Yeah this would be a great point if it were true and they didn’t give Mythos access to companies to fix bugs, which they did and have. It’s genuinely a difficult question. Not black and white. The models are really good at finding bugs, as demonstrated by people using Fable to reverse engineer. People make it sound like he’s just making it up.

I'm the guy you replied to, apologies for using a different account I'm away from my computer now.

The distinction to me is that Anthropic gives access to that model but doesn't give control. They reserve the right to cut you off if they don't like what you are doing and require you allow data retention for Fable and Mythos to ensure your are not up to any skullduggery.

Meta, Alibaba, Mistral, even OpenAI has released models users can run locally and fully control. That is a whole world of difference.

Re: Muse Spark 1.3

#170

Post by im3w1l »

badsectoracula wrote: post #159
tyre wrote: post #47

Meta is one of those companies where, if there is anything remotely comparable, I'm happy to pay more to not use them. They've had a profoundly negative impact on society and Zuckerberg is not who I want controlling the future at the top of AI. I feel the same about Grok w/ Elon. I will pay extra to use someone else. I'm not an Amodei stan, but of all of these people he seems to have the most ethical focus. Again, no…

> he seems to have the most ethical focus He wants to build a tech-god kept in chains whose power he parcels out to the unwashed masses he deems worthy like some sort of high priest of intelligence. And that is being charitable and going by the interpretation that he actually believes what he says.

Well what do you want? Presenting clear, desirable, and achievable visions and trying to build consensus for how AI should develop is crucial at this point in time.
Post reply on HN