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

Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

ai.meta.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 728 posts

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#61

Post by avaer »

cgearhart wrote: post #43
avaer wrote: post #24

> A personal AI agent can help with everyday tasks like booking reservations, monitoring prices, managing reminders, creating documents, generating images, and researching topics. Always the same thing. I wish product designers would have some modicum of imagination for how agents can actually help people. Literally none of these examples are improved by this kind of personal AI agent; on the contrary, it means letti…

Out of curiosity, do you have other ideas or things you want it to do? It just seems like they always converge on the same set of executive tasks because they’re a nail that is exceptionally well suited to this particular hammer.

How about build me a self hosted social network for keeping in touch with friends and family and make sure Meta can never get access.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#62

Post by sergiotapia »

Knowing Facebook's behavior around user data why would anyone with memory of their behavior use this product?

Why would you give them access to your accounts, your email, your purchase habits, your preferences, your communication style and more.

How do they wash this stink off?

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#63

Post by aprilthird2021 »

msh wrote: post #50
sroerick wrote: post #12

Facebook is the first to market with a polished openclaw? Good for them. I'm sure many others will criticize other aspects of Meta, and rightly so. But imagine using a Claw agent with zero tech support available

xAI/cursor was first with grokbot

People didn't know because "grokbot" sounds like a bot that makes revenge porn of your enemies

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#64

Post by Anon1096 »

RGS1811 wrote: post #13

I have a hard time understanding, given the abundance of bad faith and predatory behavior Meta has displayed over entire span of its existence, why anyone would want to consult with its "personal AI" or grant it access to "all aspects of your life".

This is probably why they are launching now. There's no real other competitor right now in the nicely made managed openclaw space for personal use (or at least, very very early. Maybe Grokbot can be considered the lead competitor but afaik it did not gain mindshare). Instinct is supposed to come out soon and by not being associated with Meta it'd be really appealing just on that front vs this. But being first to market is a real reason to use it and chance to gain lasting market share.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#65

Post by aprilthird2021 »

porridgeraisin wrote: post #35
sroerick wrote: post #12

Facebook is the first to market with a polished openclaw? Good for them. I'm sure many others will criticize other aspects of Meta, and rightly so. But imagine using a Claw agent with zero tech support available

Instinct exists with the same features. It is quite good. I was thinking they were gonna get acquired by meta 100%, but looks like meta has a competitor.

It will probably fail bc they can't compete with instant distribution to 3B people worldwide

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#66

Post by augment_me »

lxgr wrote: post #52
augment_me wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are 3 billion users of FB/WhatsApp/Instagram combined, most people don't give a shit and are just trying to minimize cognitive effort. My elderly parents would absolutely love if someone would just tell them what to do and eat every day because it would mean less planning.

WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted, so I'm not trusting Meta with much, and it's the only way I can reach quite a lot of people. A lot of people I know trust them begrudgingly (primarily with Instagram, because all of their friends are on it as well). People don't need to love a company to use its products. The perceived benefit merely needs to be bigger than the perceived cost.

This assumes completely techo-rational actors that continuously monitor cost-benefit analysis, other alternatives and switch products when one outweights the others.

This is even further away from the reality where people have breakdowns because their app icon moved location and is not in the usual spot.

The average person is optimizing towards energy use minimization by default because life is already hard enough with plans, kids, etc.

Use incentives and we will arrive at closer truths than by claims and expressions.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#67

Post by heyjamesknight »

aftbit wrote: post #48
RGS1811 wrote: post #13

I have a hard time understanding, given the abundance of bad faith and predatory behavior Meta has displayed over entire span of its existence, why anyone would want to consult with its "personal AI" or grant it access to "all aspects of your life".

Every single HN post about anything Meta-adjacent starts with a comment like this. Guys, we get it, the hive mind of HN doesn't like Meta/Facebook/Zuck. Fine. But can we actually comment on the technology and tools rather than the company for once?

Posts about Meta must bring up general distrust of the company and its leadership. Posts about Google have to mention them sunsetting products often.

It's just tradition at this point.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#68

Post by dspillett »

spiderice wrote: post #25
asveikau wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think normies have a positive association with meta.

They have over 3 billion monthly active users... Almost half the earth. I think you need to recalibrate what a "normie" is.

A great many use their products grudgingly in my experience - posting minimally, staying because network effects make it difficult to completely move, and not wanting to give FB and friends more than they already do.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#69

Post by lxgr »

augment_me wrote: post #66
lxgr wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted, so I'm not trusting Meta with much, and it's the only way I can reach quite a lot of people. A lot of people I know trust them begrudgingly (primarily with Instagram, because all of their friends are on it as well). People don't need to love a company to use its products. The perceived benefit merely needs to be bigger than the perceived cost.

This assumes completely techo-rational actors that continuously monitor cost-benefit analysis, other alternatives and switch products when one outweights the others. This is even further away from the reality where people have breakdowns because their app icon moved location and is not in the usual spot. The average person is optimizing towards energy use minimization by default because life is already hard enough wi…

Slightly different lens, same outcome: It's there, it lets people do what they want to do with acceptable effort/other negative consequences, so they use it.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#70

Post by lxgr »

cyanydeez wrote: post #58
lxgr wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted, so I'm not trusting Meta with much, and it's the only way I can reach quite a lot of people. A lot of people I know trust them begrudgingly (primarily with Instagram, because all of their friends are on it as well). People don't need to love a company to use its products. The perceived benefit merely needs to be bigger than the perceived cost.

someone's questioning that claim legally: https://www.pcmag.com/news/lawsuit-alleges-that-whatsapp-has...

And has a verdict been reached? Otherwise, people are pursuing all kinds of outlandish claims legally.
Post reply on HN