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

121–130 of 723 posts

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#121

Post by asveikau »

motoxpro wrote: post #119
asveikau wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you need to recalibrate in your own mind what using a product means. It doesn't mean you like it, or the company behind it. It may also be due to monopoly status. Do you like your utility company? Your phone company? Your ISP? Your insurance?

Huh? I would echo the sentiment of you recalibrating what a normie is. This is a crazy take. I would guess that fair amount of people have no idea that Facebook rebranded to Meta, let alone what goes on in and around the company. Meta products are entertainment, not water and power, comparing them to that is so overblown. Plenty of people don't use IG or Facebook at all, and plenty of people just go on every now and…

Here's what I found when I googled "polling on Mark Zuckerberg":

> Roughly 54% to 70% of Americans express an unfavorable view of him

> Zuckerberg is viewed negatively by both major parties. Democrats and Republicans alike report high rates of disapproval regarding his influence and leadership.

> Dislike for the Meta CEO spans all age groups, though younger adults display particularly high skepticism.

YOU GUYS are so far out of touch to say normies don't hate and distrust the people behind Meta. They will use the products but this is not a positive reflection on the brand at all.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#122

Post by lxgr »

bossyTeacher wrote: post #80
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.

> WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted, - Meta data of your messages is not encrypted so meta can make a graph of who you talk to and when - backups are not encrypted by default so plaintext of your private chats can be obtained - even if you enable encryption for backups all it takes is for the other person in your private convo (or a person in a group chat) to not enable it for your messages to be available in plaintex…

> - backups are not encrypted by default so plaintext of your private chats can be obtained

Yes, but importantly not by Meta themselves.

> - Meta data of your messages is not encrypted so meta can make a graph of who you talk to and when

Fair enough and worth mentioning. I'm personally fine with it.

> - even if you enable encryption for backups all it takes is for the other person in your private convo (or a person in a group chat) to not enable it for your messages to be available in plaintext

Yes, but how would you prevent that even in principle? I can't control what the people I'm messaging do with their copy of my messages. As long as there isn't unnecessary non-repudiation (e.g. by the sender cryptographically signing all outbound messages, which the Signal protocol intentionally avoids), I think this is fair as well.

I do agree that e.g. vanishing chats with a short timeout/"view only once" images should probably not be included in backups, though; last time I checked, I think they were.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#123

Post by bel8 »

bilalnpe wrote: post #95
bel8 wrote: post #81

I think they had this sitting idle for a while, waiting for their AI division to deliver a capable LLM to power it. Now they have Muse Spark 1.3, which is somewhere between Sonnet and Flable (Opus tier in my experience) in intelligence, but is very fast at 200+ tok/s. I have been using Muse Spark 1.3 contrib (the one that shares your data for training but is much cheaper) via OpenCode Go $10/mo plan for coding and th…

The amount of usage you get is insane when you stack OpenCode GO subsidy on top of contributor. There is already evidence of groups setting websites and "think tanks" that aren't for human but for influencing AIs scraping them. I wonder if having the contributor model read and summarize your propaganda would be even more effective. Instead of astroturfing reddit, just feed it to the model directly. Give it generated…

Poisoning LLM? I remember at least one study about it. Perhaps but it would have to be very subtle otherwise they might flag your content and shadowban it from future training.

My personal opinion is that trying to make LLMs inefficient is futile and causes even more waste of earth resources.

It's like trying to stop a coal-powered locomotive by parking a truck on the rails. You're just going to make the thing burn more coal before reaching it's destination.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#124

Post by edgarvaldes »

shimman wrote: post #77
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.

This comment is one of the most dystopian things I've read on this site.

>My elderly parents would absolutely love if someone would just tell them what to do and eat every day

I guess a lot of the AI enthusiasts are already pushing the "I automated my daily life decisions to this awesome AI. I now have more time and more brain power left to be productive!" angle.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#125

Post by iamdelirium »

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

This is not even true. Gemini Spark has been there for a while.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#126

Post by RGS1811 »

matherial wrote: post #108
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".

I had that conversation several times with friends outside of tech. The universal reaction is just a shrug - "my life is boring, what do they care". And yes, you can counter with a hypothetical about a future totalitarian police state, or evil hackers, or whatever, but that makes you sound crazy. In practice, it's a trade-off most people are comfortable making because they can't think of anything that some trillion-d…

I get this, and I’ve said similar things about privacy and security in the past, but Meta in particular has a history of intentionally using customer data and behavior to the detriment of those customers. Creating experiences designed to ensnare, addict, and ultimately harm their users. This goes beyond paranoia about security or privacy. It’s handing your drug dealer the keys to your house.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#127

Post by bilalnpe »

bel8 wrote: post #123
bilalnpe wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The amount of usage you get is insane when you stack OpenCode GO subsidy on top of contributor. There is already evidence of groups setting websites and "think tanks" that aren't for human but for influencing AIs scraping them. I wonder if having the contributor model read and summarize your propaganda would be even more effective. Instead of astroturfing reddit, just feed it to the model directly. Give it generated…

Poisoning LLM? I remember at least one study about it. Perhaps but it would have to be very subtle otherwise they might flag your content and shadowban it from future training. My personal opinion is that trying to make LLMs inefficient is futile and causes even more waste of earth resources. It's like trying to stop a coal-powered locomotive by parking a truck on the rails. You're just going to make the thing burn m…

I wasn't talking about poisoning LLM for generally degrading performance/improvement. But for manipulating answers for propaganda/ideological reasons.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#128

Post by jawilson2 »

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.

Take a picture of my son's printed basketball calendar and add it to my shared iCloud family calendar. Apple/Siri couldn't do it, Claude couldn't do it. Things STILL can't talk to each other, seemingly intentionally. My wife and tried over the summer. I told her Claude+Siri could do this in 30s, and she would try by hand. 20 minutes later she was done adding each event manually, and I still couldn't get beyond trying to convince Calendar on my iPhone to open an ics or whatever file. I was supposed to open the file from Apple Mail, which I don't use, and email it from gmail or something.

This example should be "Super Friendly AI Assistant!!" and it fails on the absolute most basic thing I could throw at it.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#129

Post by andrewingram »

msdz wrote: post #5
misrasaurabh1 wrote: post #2

I really don't want to share all my personal life information with meta like this.

In fact, I’d go as far as to say there’s few companies I’d entrust less the level of data required for a tool like a “personal AI agent”…

Only one i'd trust less is SpaceX, and they're other major player in this space...
Post reply on HN