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

741–750 of 760 posts

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#741

Post by jvwww »

moomoo11 wrote: post #136
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

these are all tarpit ideas i've gone on many trips before, and one of the most fun parts of it is doing the actual planning and finding stuff i'd much rather AI do the boring shit, like when it comes to insurance with multiple parties and service providers involved that don't talk to each other at all, making things 10x more complicated than they need to be

To each their own, I don't enjoy planning things in the slightest.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#744

Post by webern777 »

magicmicah85 wrote: post #252
abixb wrote: post #234

I think Meta's strategy is to capture the 'normie-tier' of AI users. I know most of us here on HN track model releases quite frequently and discuss every parameter weight out of them, but most of the world is just... oblivious? I was discussing latest in tech with an accounting friend out of curiosity, and I kept talking about tiers of GPT-5.6 (Sol vs Terra vs Luna) and asked which one she used on the desktop 'Work'…

Literally what I was about to comment. This is meant to capture the normies, the busy parents managing school and work, the grandparents who want to make most of their retirement. I am trying it now. It let me name my muse as Satan. I appreciate that it understands my humor, but I'm also not joking at the same time.

My parents are in their 70s and retired, I can't even vaguely imagine what they would use this for.

If they have any problems in life, it is that they have too much time on their hands already. An AI agent that automates tasks so they have more free time is exactly what they would not want.

What they really want is something worth spending their time on. That is what everyone pretty much wants but instead we get this bullshit.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#746

Post by noisy_boy »

ArnoVW wrote: post #447
willsmith72 wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ah what a throwback.. I thought I was so efficient copy pasting all day long

I call it by it's official name: MCP (Manual Copy-Paste)

MCP when token budget is running low. The web interface is token frugal because it has to work with whatever I provide.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#747

Post by zerr »

anomaly_ wrote: post #600
zerr wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an engineer, the enjoyment from the process is not less important, or should I say more important, than the enjoyment from shipping a final product.

Do you think the company that pays your wage thinks the same?

Yes, engineer experience/happiness is part of the equation. The company also thinks that agentic workflow will clutter the codebase.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#748

Post by zerr »

loeg wrote: post #734
zerr wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an engineer, the enjoyment from the process is not less important, or should I say more important, than the enjoyment from shipping a final product.

As an engineer, I know what I'm getting paid to deliver is the work product. I don't have too much attachment to any particular set of tools to get there.

If we follow that logic, I believe it means that you would be quite happy in the Product Owner role, or in the role of a client who outsources the actual development activities. I wouldn't.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#749

Post by 10xLeverage »

jryle70 wrote: post #730
anthonyskipper wrote: post #647

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what you say is not entirely true. There is much to love about companies burning cash on R&D. That's how a lot of greatness happened. But what is wrong in the meta situation is that while Meta officially projects its 2026 AI capital expenditures to be between $130 billion and $145 billion, investigative reports indicate its true future liabilities exceed $690 billion once unlisted back-end deals and lease commitm…

Can you link to those reports? How reputable are the investigators? Financial market has great incentive to stay informed. Those 401ks are their bread and butter customers, and not every bank/fund is Meta's co-conspirator in its shady deals, if any.

Its in every 10-Q and 10-K. Original poster read 1 article in the WSJ and thinks he/they uncovered a massive conspiracy. Its disclosed exactly as it should be according to GAAP accounting. They went above & beyond to disclose them in the text narrative of the filings because the GAAP requirements require them not to include them in the numbers.

WSJ just needs to sound alarm bells so people keep paying for their crappy journalism, and thus everything they write becomes alarmist slop.

https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0001326801/abad205...

pg47 of the 2Q26 10-Q, linked above.

Ultimately, the equity is really cheap even today on trailing numbers. ~12x EV/trailing EBITDA excluding-RL losses and still growing 25%-34% in each of the last 4 quarters organically at $200B+ of scale.

One of my pet peeves is that people who dont understand business forbid these companies from making investments or starting new businesses now or in the future. Meta has been sitting on $50-100b of cash on the balance sheet for years, and people lose their minds when they start to meaningfully invest it. I think theyve earned the right to diversify

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#750

Post by FallCheeta7373 »

dkrich wrote: post #629
Gareth321 wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Billions of people use Facebook regularly. It's a tiny minority of us who would not use a useful product because of privacy concerns. I think you are wrong. It's not they who are a "special kind of stupid." It is us who are a "special kind of paranoid." Justifiably so, I would contend.

This is exactly right and has been proven over and over again. People do not care about sharing their info. Lots of people particularly around these parts pound the table that they should but they are simply fighting the market.

hacker news has a alive tradition if fighting the markets and losing
Post reply on HN