Live data from Hacker News

Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

ai.meta.com

201–210 of 392 posts

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#201
post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which is why Elon is building a fab now At least he says he's doing that. It doesn't really make sense since you're not going to achieve an advanced node from a standing start in a practical time frame and cost. Sounds like more Musk flavored vapor.

> It doesn't really make sense since you're not going to achieve an advanced node from a standing start in a practical time frame and cost. They already announced a partnership with Intel.

Oh the irony.

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#203

This really reinforces the idea that the AI race and the Railroad Mania of the 19th century are very similar. So many different companies are going to have similarly powerful ai that there will be no moat around it and it will be cheap. They will never earn their investment back.

I suspect this is the real reason behind Anthropic limiting subscriptions to their own products and keeping API prices several times higher than comparable models. Applications more sticky than API users and less technical users more sticky than programmers (ie Cowork more sticky than Code).

Anthropic generally seem more into living within market discipline and market signals of some sort. Products with margins, even if it's sort of irrelevant considering R&D costs and capital inflow.

That said, there's nothing like the real thing.

The risk is something like the railroad bubble and the dotcom. Over-investement, circular revenue and a timeline that doesn't work.

Or, maybe it'll work out.

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#204

Sarcasm aside, tried it (with instant mode), it's an impressive model. It nailed all the ChatGPT meme gotchas (walk to the carwash, Alice 50 brothers, upside down cup, R's in strawberry, which number is bigger, 9.11 or 9.9?) I guess all that money poaching OpenAI / Anthropic talent went somewhere... Now, would I use "Meta Muse Code" or "Muse CoWork" if I have to have a facebook account to all of my developers? Maybe…

so since they hard programmed all of the meme gotchas, they built a good model?

lazy snark < playing around with it

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#206
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...

Good catch - looks like it's a PNG image, with an alpha channel for the rounded corners, and a subtle gradient in the background. The gradient is rendered with dithering, to prevent colour banding. The dither pattern is random, which introduces lots of noise. Since noise can't be losslessly compressed, the PNG is an enormous 6.2 bits per pixel.

While working on a web-based graphics editor, I've noticed that users upload a lot of PNG assets with this problem. I've never tracked down the cause... is there a popular raster image editor which recently switched to dithered rendering of gradients?

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#207

Saying nothing about the actual performance of this model, it does strike me how .... minimal(?) this announcement is. Their safety section is like 2 paragraphs about bioweapons. Go look at the reports for OpenAI and Anthropic's model releases. It's like 50+ pages of tests, examples, reports, and benchmarks across a bunch of safety and wellfare metrics. If Meta wants to be seen as a cutting edge massive lab they need…

Rumor on the ground is that they expected a much stronger model than this one.

Funny contrast with Anthropic. Ant does a "hero run," gets a model much more powerful than they expect. Meta does a hero run, gets a model much more mediocre than they expect. Read into this what you will, I guess?

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#208

I'm struck by all these independent announcements saying "look at our new model that we only spent $N Billion in acquisitions and hardware time to build and operate that's just like those other ones but this one is ours." Because if any of these companies would simply pool resources and work together, and if the government actively participated in providing funds, they'd be able to accelerate AI so much faster. It al…

Competition often foster innovation. Why are they innovating so fast and spending so much money? Because they don’t wanna get behind. If there was no competition at all then there would be much less reason to innovate and spend resources.

> Competition often foster innovation.

So does cooperation in any framework that values public good over pure obedience to an inherently-abusive late stage capitalism. I know that's passé in a world where the US government no longer believes in funding science, and yet.

Competition is also inherently wasteful. And if you're talking about wasting a few K or a few Mil here or there, fine, whatever. But here we're talking about waste on the order of trillions of dollars at the end of the day.

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#209

So this is why Anthropic rushed the weirdest "pre-responsible-disclosure-totally-not-for-marketing" announcement yesterday? To make sure Spark doesn't steal their thunder? (Spark beats Opus 4.6 on some benchmarks...). Or did I become a bitter cynical old man.

Anthropic had their mythos post (and model) basically ready a few weeks ago, as evidenced by the blog content leaks. Also I highly doubt they just threw together a 250-page PDF model card in a "rush."

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#210
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…

It's a decent model if the benchmarks are to be believed, but it won't be close to Opus in usefulness for programming. None of these benchmarks completely capture what makes a model useful for day-to-day coding tasks, unfortunately. It will take time for them to catch up, and Opus will keep improving in the meantime. But it's good to have more competition.
Post reply on HN