Live data from Hacker News

Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

ai.meta.com

111–120 of 392 posts

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#111
post #22

This would have been an amazing release 6 months ago. But the industry moves so fast, this is a trite release. Maybe it’s best for Meta to sell their superintelligence division. I don’t think Zuck’s vision is particularly compelling.

I never understood why meta decided to join the race. They don’t sell compute like Google or Microsoft. Why not let others do the hard work and integrate their LLMs in your systems if needed? I assume it’s because they have Instagram, Facebook, WhatsApp, Thread data and feel they should be the ones using them for training, but it’s really not obvious how having a frontier AI lab benefits their business

A few things:

1) meta was doing this at scale before openAI

2) decent ML is critical to catagorising content at scale, the more accurate and fast the category, the finer the recommendations can be (ie instead of woman, outside as a tag for a video, woman, age, hair colour, location, subjects in view, main subject of video, video style) doing that as fast as possible with as little energy as possible is mission critical

3) The llama leak basically evaporated the moat around openAI who _could_ have become a competitor

4) for the AR stuff, all of these models (and visual models) are required to make the platform work. They also need complete ownership so that it can be distilled to make it run on tiny hardware

5) dick swinging

6) they genuinely want to become a industrial behemoth, so robots, hardware, etc are now all in scope.

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#112
post #92

I don't get the comments trashing this. If it slightly beats or even matches Opus 4.6, it means Meta is capable of building a model competitive with the leading AI company. Sure, they spent a lot of money and will have on-going costs. But how much more work would it take to turn that into a coding agent people are willing to try (and pay for) along side their usage of a collection of agents (Claude, Codex, etc)? Also…

> If it slightly beats or even matches Opus 4.6

It doesn't though

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#114
post #98

The hero image on the linked page, which consists of a muted teal background with the words "Introducing Muse Spark", weighs in at 3,5MB. I don't even...

complaining about sand on the beach

I am simply offended. By Meta's lack of sensibilities (or ability) towards use of images on the Web while touting their new flavour of artificial intelligence as a product.

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's benchmaxxed. If they actually matched Opus 4.6 on such a short timeline, it would have been mighty impressive. (Keep in mind this is a new lab and they are prohibited from doing distills.)

how do you know it's benchmaxxed?

For one, they aren't using the latest version of many of the benchmarks. eg, ARC-AGI 2 and not 3, etc.

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#116

We all know it... but I think they were very bold in this warning about using your private messages to train public models. _Your messages with AIs will be used to improve AI at Meta. Don't share information, including sensitive topics, about others or yourself that you don't want the AI to retain and use_

meta doesn't exactly instill confidence on using personal data responsibly. hard pass

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#117
post #92

I don't get the comments trashing this. If it slightly beats or even matches Opus 4.6, it means Meta is capable of building a model competitive with the leading AI company. Sure, they spent a lot of money and will have on-going costs. But how much more work would it take to turn that into a coding agent people are willing to try (and pay for) along side their usage of a collection of agents (Claude, Codex, etc)? Also…

> If it slightly beats or even matches Opus 4.6 It doesn't though

Curious on why you think this. Any data points that led you to this?

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comments trashing this are rightly correct skeptics who remember the benchmaxxing of llama 4. This model was out in the woods as early as like a couple months ago but they didn't release it because it was at gemini 2.5 pro levels.

The llama4 series was one of the earliest large MoE's to be made publically available. People just ignored it because they were focused on running smaller and denser models at the time, we should know better these days.

the models were objectively horrible

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#120
post #22

This would have been an amazing release 6 months ago. But the industry moves so fast, this is a trite release. Maybe it’s best for Meta to sell their superintelligence division. I don’t think Zuck’s vision is particularly compelling.

I never understood why meta decided to join the race. They don’t sell compute like Google or Microsoft. Why not let others do the hard work and integrate their LLMs in your systems if needed? I assume it’s because they have Instagram, Facebook, WhatsApp, Thread data and feel they should be the ones using them for training, but it’s really not obvious how having a frontier AI lab benefits their business

From what I heard Meta is spending hundreds of millions each month in Claude credits for developers. So that’s a huge saving if they have own models that match Opus.
Post reply on HN