Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

ai.meta.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 392 posts

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#361

Post by andai »

ai5iq wrote: post #285
modeless wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Benchmarks miss the thing that actually matters for agentic use: how does behavior change over a multi-day horizon? A model that scores well on one-shot coding tasks can still make terrible decisions when it has persistent state and resource constraints. That's where you see the real gaps between models.

Is there a benchmark for these long tasks? That kind of seems like the only number worth measuring.

(Of course at that point it involves memory and context management and so on, so you're testing the harness as well as the model.)

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#363

Post by andai »

daft_pink wrote: post #43

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.

Well all of them are already in bed with the government, so they're going to find themselves with slightly more assistance than a free market would predict.

If they somehow do fail, then the output of that process will be fantastic open weight models (and hopefully some leaks). I want to say those will pay dividends for decades... but a better prediction is that they will be obsolete within three months ;)

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#364

Post by andai »

netcan wrote: post #203
cheriot wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The weird position they find themselves in now is that they have to keep making it smarter... but they already made it too smart (Mythos). I'm not sure how that's going to work out exactly.

They find an arbitrary intelligence cutoff point between Opus and Mythos, label it "acceptable risk", and then the labs coordinate to gradually nudge that line forward and hope the internet doesn't break?

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#365

Post by andai »

throwaway173738 wrote: post #304
netcan wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Maybe they’ll figure out how to make an agent train an agent.

The labs started doing that in late 2024, they all published research on it.

Curiously, mid 2025, they all simultaneously implemented increasingly bizarre restrictions on "self replication". I don't think there was anything public but it sure sounds like something spooked them. (Or maybe just taking sensible precautions, given the direction of the whole endeavour.)

At any rate, I recently asked Opus about "Did PKD know about living information systems?" and the safety filter ended the conversation. It started answering me, and then it's response was deleted and a red warning box popped up.

But notably, I was given the option to continue the chat with a dumber model (presumably one less capable of producing whatever it thinks I meant by that phrase).

Also, I told GPT-5 about my self-modifying Python AI programmer, and it became extremely uncomfortable. I told it an older version of itself had designed and built it (GPT-4 in 2023), and it didn't like that at all! So something's definitely changed in the safety training there.

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#366

Post by ghywertelling »

andai wrote: post #364
netcan wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The weird position they find themselves in now is that they have to keep making it smarter... but they already made it too smart (Mythos). I'm not sure how that's going to work out exactly. They find an arbitrary intelligence cutoff point between Opus and Mythos, label it "acceptable risk", and then the labs coordinate to gradually nudge that line forward and hope the internet doesn't break?

I think we will see unbundling of large model into submodels: modular, smaller and efficient, only include what you need eg a CUA model, a reasoning model, a legal model, a writing model, a coding model (this could get subdivided into different languages). That way you only update that submodel which needs retraining.

Re: Muse Spark: Scaling towards personal superintelligence

#368

Post by simonw »

sunaookami wrote: post #348
simonw wrote: post #281

Pelicans: https://simonwillison.net/2026/Apr/8/muse-spark/ I also had a poke around with the tools exposed on https://meta.ai/ - they're pretty cool, there's a Code Interpreter Python container thing now and they also have an image analysis tool called "container.visual_grounding" which is a lot of fun.

Seems like not all tools are available everywhere? Don't have access to visual_grounding sadly, only these: https://embed.fbsbx.com/playables/view/4208761039384112/?ext...

Interesting, you got some I didn't: animate image, create video and get reference audio.
Post reply on HN