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

451–460 of 723 posts

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#451

Post by nullbio »

hokumguru wrote: post #379
jmathai wrote: post #340

> Your personal data is safe and secure That's from the article. I can't think of anyone I'd trust less with my data than Meta. Well, thieves, I guess.

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.

True, actually. Anthropic is a much bigger danger than anything else right now. Still though, Meta earns a solid 10% of trust from me.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#452

Post by IshKebab »

tyre wrote: post #398
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.

TIL openai owns chat.com I hung out with my parents this weekend and heard them talking about "chat", as a noun. I assumed they were talking about ChatGPT; there being a literal chat.com makes sense why they'd call it that.

Surely the way streamers talk to "chat"? I've never heard anyone call ChatGPT "chat".

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#453

Post by loeg »

mathisfun123 wrote: post #448
ajkjk wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are wrong, but of course it's just a guess.

Chatgpt has 469 million daily active users as of September 2026. Who exactly do you think they are? Martians? Because there aren't half a billion SWEs on planet earth.

What percent of ChatGPT users do you think know the company behind it is OpenAI? 10%?

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#454

Post by juggle-anyhow »

ajkjk wrote: post #240
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'…

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.

They call it "Chatty"

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#455

Post by xfz »

jmathai wrote: post #340

> Your personal data is safe and secure That's from the article. I can't think of anyone I'd trust less with my data than Meta. Well, thieves, I guess.

Also:

"...and your conversations are not shared with Meta's ad systems".

I think they missed off "for now".

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#456

Post by chicagobuss »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #422
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.

> Most people don't know about the existence of companies called "OpenAI" or "Anthropic", or that they are worth a lot of money. I agree with your general premise but that one sounds like bullshit to me. Tons of people who otherwise don't know anything about LLMs know about these companies specifically because they are worth a lot of money, and of course tons of people know who OpenAI is because of ChatGPT.

go ask 100 random people across the world and I bet less than 20 will know both those company names.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#457

Post by loeg »

zerr wrote: post #444
redox99 wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you... code by copy pasting chatgpt web???

I code by hand (sigh) and copy paste some snippets once in a while from a web chat LLM. This also means every single line of such snippets gets reviewed and anaylzed. Usually, these are some arcane Win32 API usage where otherwise I'd have to dig into old forums. I don't want to become a prompt engineer so I stay away from "agentic" workflows.

You're missing out, for better or worse.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#458

Post by yalok »

Barbing wrote: post #421
yalok wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes, it was not easy to mentally give that access, but then I heard from friends how much work was put in into securing it and separating LLM/agents from the API tokens access (also saw this detailed blog post from the lead developer - https://research.meta.ai/blog/security-and-safety-for-ai-age... ), plus I had the pressure to get the problem resolved - so I decided to risk and try it out. Eventually, though, Muse C…

Ah, your concern was about an LLM messing something up, vs. about becoming a (tiny tiny) piece of training data for Zucky / getting slightly more targeted ads (or price discriminated against or something in the future)? Mm, I see a small note on the second half of a bullet ( https://about.fb.com/news/2026/09/introducing-muse-personal-... ) that you can opt out of training. I know I’m a privacy weirdo since this didn’…

I was just answering a question above about the email access concerns. What you mention is another concern, but personally, if they are going to be showing ads to me, I'd actually prefer them to targeted for versus some totally random stuff.

As for training, I'd be highly surprised if they use the data they get from APIs for training. But the conversation itself & thinking trajectories probably will, unless you opt out, like you pointed out.

Re: Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

#459

Post by yard2010 »

m11a wrote: post #258
randycupertino wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think of my mom who doesn't care and doesn't understand the difference between google AI Overview vs actual google search results. "I looked it up" - she doesn't care what tool she is using she just wants answers to how long bake pork or the best throw pillows to buy or whatever else she is looking up. She's mostly using google AI tools because it's easy and free and on her landing page.

tbh I also use google AI tools frequently. It’s convenient (search bar is top of my window), and extremely fast at generation. For quick Qs, opening a chat bot and changing the default reasoning from my coding settings, switching from Work to Chat, etc etc, is too much of a faff.

I ended up adding -ai to every search in the browser level to turn this crap off. I couldn't find a way to disable it otherwise. I did it after it hallucinated the world cup games schedule which made my friend send wrong events to everyone after he "looked it up". Can't stop this from him, but at least this honest mistake won't happen to me.
Post reply on HN