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

651–660 of 723 posts

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#651

Post by foolinaround »

dd8601fn wrote: post #317
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.

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.

i think the spread of youtube shorts and tiktoks is the reason for this. In around a minute, an expert provides a quick summary (talking points) in a digestible format that the person fully understands, but of course, no details or caveats etc are provided. Because this person now is able to understand that content, they conflate that understanding to an much broader understanding. This is even in areas they should know more, like the current geo-political or trade conflicts

edit : is there a name for what I am describing, different from the Gell-man amnesia? ( which assumes experts?).

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#654

Post by [deleted] »

glenngillen wrote: post #562
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.

Is this unique to AI? I feel like something changed with social media becoming kinda ubiquitous. Like everyone suddenly felt the need to have an opinion on every thing. And on lots of divisive topics the fact you might not have an opinion could have you face criticism for not caring and/or being on the "other" side to whatever position your accuser/interrogator is. I don't actually know what it is or when the phenome…

[deleted]

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#655

Post by motoxpro »

asveikau wrote: post #403
motoxpro wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Most Americans Still Like Facebook, Poll Finds—But Not Mark Zuckerberg Or Its New Meta Name" https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2021/11/02/most-am... Which was my point: CEO affinity =/= the affinity for the product people use

That article is a few years old. https://yougov.com/en-gb/topics/brand/Meta-Brand

Sorry, again, this data proves my point. "Disliked by 28%" is not a majority.

And "Meta" is not the product people use.

Instagram is at 19% disliked. Majority "like" instagram. https://yougov.com/en-gb/topics/application/Instagram-Mobile...

BMW is at 14% disliked. Just as another "not everyones cup of tea" brand comparison. https://yougov.com/en-gb/topics/brand/BMW

I just don't think people (normies) care. You can dislike a CEO but that doesn't mean you dislike the product or use it less.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#656

Post by HDThoreaun »

rglullis wrote: post #636
redox99 wrote: post #533

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just use opencode/pi/etc with an open weight model?

Does it bother you so much to see people out there who can go on without their lives being shaped by the Corporations?

It bothers me when people have terrible inefficient workflows for no good reason

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#657

Post by Eisenstein »

altmanaltman wrote: post #614
alt227 wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meta certainly do give the impression that they are burning through ridiculous amounts of cash with not much to show for it, and thats just from the outside.

How is it a bad thing if a company goes all in on burning cash but at the time have never reported a net loss quarter since its IPO? Its their money to burn at this point who cares

I would have to say that its tragic more than bad. Meta consumed whole industries that used to spend the money on a bunch of different things. Now all the revenue goes to Meta shareholders and whatever it is Zuck is wasting billions of dollars on pursuing.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#658

Post by aerodexis »

hazelnut wrote: post #142
dools wrote: post #91

I love how the marketing departments of these things always imagine people are just constantly plagued by the hassle of organising their flights, restaurant bookings and movie tickets

It's because people who create these use cases perceive this as a difficult and painful task - but how many people really think about their flights over the day? Pretty sure the majority of Meta users has not flight booked for the next 3 months. I can only assume that this is more seen as a showstopper. Look how difficult this is and how we solved it. Shopping is another classic. I personally don't want to trust an A…

handling end-to-end flight booking seems like a very good target use-case that if you can get right, implies that you got a lot of other things right. Just like how Amazon started off by selling books online.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#659

Post by aerodexis »

jmathai wrote: post #418
hokumguru wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I trust Meta far more than, say, Anthropic. For one, the judgments against them from the government just mean that they have tons of oversight and auditing happening now. The other providers are just the wild west with privacy.

Really? There's so much information about how Meta targeted children with addictive design patterns. They paid the fine, and profited in the meantime. Do you really think they have any reason not to do the same in the future?

They will use it for nefarious but "legal" purposes - however - they have decades of experience handling such data and keeping it "safe" from "illegal" purposes.
Post reply on HN