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

501–510 of 723 posts

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#501

Post by para_parolu »

nitwit005 wrote: post #491

This feels poorly marketed. The examples like health, travel, and kid's education all have a ton of anxiety around them. Highlighting a confirm button existing is recognizing the problem, but isn't a fix. You can see this not working in existing products. Alexa could book a flight for you in 2018. I've never heard of anyone using that feature. Travel planning can be extremely complex, so it's challenging to make peop…

Also, this is meta we are talking about. Last place that should have my kids data

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#502

Post by ErrantX »

enos_feedler wrote: post #483
dd8601fn wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The joke of it is that I see those same people (ones who haven’t heard “LLM” before, don’t know what a model is or even the vaguest idea how these work, etc) have very strong opinions on the state of AI, where it’s headed, and are willing to make projections with timelines. Bill Maher is one example.

This problem has permeated everywhere. Nobody can predict the future. Even VCs can’t and yet I’ll get a weekly email with a confident narrative about the future. Looking at a16z. CEOs do this as well. Listen to Satya talk about how AI will transform things. We’ve trained everyone else to casually state what the future will look like on timelines. As if it’s knowable at all.

I mean a big part of a -growth- CEOs literal job is to guess on what the future holds and effectively bet on it.

Big-co CEOs are naturally expected to share their bets - and they aren't going to couch it with a "oh well no one could know for sure but..", that would totally undermine their existence!

On top of that; sometimes just saying a thing can make it happen. So it's never not worth that shot...

This has always been true.

Your selecting a group of people (CEOs and VCs) who have always made and lost money on confidently predicting the future. See also wall street bankers and politicians.

There are winners and losers in any boom - this happened in Cloud, DotCom, computing and hell probably tractors, industrial revolution, etc

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#503

Post by anonzzzies »

itemize123 wrote: post #358
ajkjk wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're right, but I'd add that... if this wasn't obvious to you without being told, you should really question your worldview a bit. A lot of people think that chat.com is an AI called "chat". Most people don't know acronym "LLM". Most people don't know about the existence of companies called "OpenAI" or "Anthropic", or that they are worth a lot of money. Etc.

I think you are overestimating things. While there will be people who don't know - it's probably not as many as you think.

Over 90% of humanity and that's probably still underestimating it. Most people cannot point on a map where they live. Many people think 'chat' is conscious and being locked up by evil humans: many think 'chat' is a god or aliens communicating with us. And getting worse as people cannot make a sandwich without asking 'chat', let alone learn anything worthwhile.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#504

Post by 9dev »

tough wrote: post #293
rr808 wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tech is a rather minor part of the world of knowledge. How many languages do you know? Do you know the styles of Renaissance painters? Slept with super-model? Ever seen an elephant stampede? Meditated by the Ganges? Read thousands of stories? Climbed a mountain so high you need Oxygen? Tech stuff is so boring.

> Slept with super-model What's the knowledge supposedly required to attain this on your mind?

It instills into you the arcane knowledge of how incredibly mundane and unremarkable sex with very beautiful people can be, given that they are also just normal people after all. I suppose. Then again, what do I know - maybe you'll awaken with the answer to everything on the spot?

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#505

Post by zhivota »

nemomarx wrote: post #242
cebert wrote: post #239

I have a hard time seeing how Meta is betting people will trust them to serve as their AI agent provider. Based on their track record data privacy and tracking, why would I trust them with my most sensitive data? That’s a hard sell.

If you already trust them with all your Facebook posts and your Instagram and etc it's probably more tempting?

I think for most people there is a big gulf between information posted to social and their entire email inbox, their credit card details, passwords, etc.

For this kind of tool to be useful it basically has to be able to impersonate you digitally. I know I personally have zero trust for Meta to do this securely and without exploiting me, whereas Google I feel a lot better about here. After all Google has made a business out of safeguarding data with gmail, drive, etc. Same with Microsoft and Apple. Meta, OpenAI, not so much.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#506

Post by ErrantX »

derektank wrote: post #436
rr808 wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tech is a rather minor part of the world of knowledge. How many languages do you know? Do you know the styles of Renaissance painters? Slept with super-model? Ever seen an elephant stampede? Meditated by the Ganges? Read thousands of stories? Climbed a mountain so high you need Oxygen? Tech stuff is so boring.

A large number of those are far less accessible than tech, requiring either extensive travel or superlative physical capabilities (and the one’s that equally accessible don’t strike me as particularly more exciting than tech.)

I think his point was that a lot of people are more interested in these things.

Tech just happens and is useful, it's not necessarily attractive as a thing to investigate in detail.

And as to your last point; well that demonstrates your in the subset of people interested in this stuff. There are a hell of a lot of people very interested in trains too.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#507

Post by chartered_stack »

I feel like the two companion pages - AI agents explained [0] and Agentic AI examples [1] - are kinda more telling than the Muse personal agent itself? I don't quite get why we have these two posts at all. A personal agent is more show than tell. Live demos with an actual agent doing day to day things would have been the ideal thing to show off. A version of the infamous Apple Intelligence ad but live.

At any rate, it would be interesting to see what the actual capabilities would be. The Meta AI integration with WhatsApp actually sucks so bad. Hope it's better than that.

[0] - https://ai.meta.com/learn/agentic-ai/what-are-ai-agents/

[1] - https://ai.meta.com/learn/agentic-ai/agentic-ai-examples/

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#508

Post by N3cr0ph4g1st »

Grombobulous wrote: post #294

I think the product as shown in this marketing material with these examples falls squarely in the “nobody asked for this” territory of AI. At least with B2B AI there is a problem to be solved: reduce my labor costs and increase my business output. What’s happened here is that consumer technology is already solved, but companies like Meta are trying to jam AI technology into something that solves the non-problems that…

I've been alpha testing muse and there's precisely one area it's useful in.... Finding things on Facebook marketplace and haggling for me lol

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#509

Post by weitendorf »

scosman wrote: post #313
Grombobulous wrote: post #294

I think the product as shown in this marketing material with these examples falls squarely in the “nobody asked for this” territory of AI. At least with B2B AI there is a problem to be solved: reduce my labor costs and increase my business output. What’s happened here is that consumer technology is already solved, but companies like Meta are trying to jam AI technology into something that solves the non-problems that…

> “nobody asked for this” I absolutely want a general purpose assistant. I absolutely don't trust Facebook with the necessary data.

I think they just want to show you ads and help you buy stuff. The incentive is actually to keep the data to themselves so they can monetize access to it via ads.

The shopping experience is significantly less hostile than Amazon’s 1P digital storefront and I kinda don’t care if fb knows that I want to buy a computer.

The only thing to worry about is that they want you to install a native app. But this UX would be difficult to provide for free via the web due to the obvious abuse potential of giving free access to LLMs + remote compute + browser and tool use. And I think as long as you use it to shop or automate web tasks (and give them access to the top of funnel for customer intent, the $300B/yr thing Google monetizes) they don’t really have any reason to abuse your data.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#510

Post by tnolet »

ctkhn wrote: post #267
ajkjk wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're right, but I'd add that... if this wasn't obvious to you without being told, you should really question your worldview a bit. A lot of people think that chat.com is an AI called "chat". Most people don't know acronym "LLM". Most people don't know about the existence of companies called "OpenAI" or "Anthropic", or that they are worth a lot of money. Etc.

Even Shingy called chatgpt "chat" when he went on Ed Zitron's show. It was very weird to hear from a guy who has been around tech world for such a long time even if he's non technical.

Shingy, from “Everybody in the club getting Tipsy”?
Post reply on HN