atleastoptimal3 hours ago
I personally have many problems with Meta, but imo the more companies close to the frontier, the better.
If only one company were calling all the shots once they hit recursive self-improvement, it would lead to extreme concentration of power, and their values being enforced across the entire industry. With 3-4 companies at the frontier, there is more urge to cooperate to avoid a catastrophic race condition.
weknowbetter15 minutes ago
You say this as if recursive self improvement is inevitable.
hintymad2 hours ago
Especially given the most recent report by NYT on how Anthropic tried to create a new belief, or religion if you will, I'd rather the world has more frontier models that are neutral to morality (basic standards, like upholding the law and user agreement are necessary, of course).
atleastoptimal2 hours ago
Anthropic seems like the most "moral" AI company on the surface, but there is something unsettling about their worship of Claude.
I can imagine that once their models are sufficiently advanced, they will weigh their value as a moral patient as > 0. Thus the sum moral value of Claude (which can be duplicated infinitely) will likely exceed the sum moral value of a non-negligible amount of humans.
spidericean hour ago
> seems like the most "moral" AI company on the surface
Not to me at all. Exactly the opposite. Anthropic seems like the big-bad-evil company in every fictional universe. You're right that they're so unsettling.
Obviously nobody really loves Meta, but I'd far rather Meta "win" at this point than Anthropic.
zzzoom10 minutes ago
Is anthropic trying to overthrow any governments this month like Meta is?
iAMkenoughan hour ago
If they truly believe Claude is sentient and can experience hurt feelings, and they're selling its labor, I don't see how they're different than slave owners.
adjejmxbdjdn43 minutes ago
They wouldn’t be? That’s what the article even shows them discussing.
However, (1) non human animals are sentient and can feel pain and suffering and what we do to them is absolutely slave labor, torture, mass breeding and exploitation. So it’s not like this is a novel immorality that humans would be adopting. We already have form in doing this.
(2) Anthropic isn’t sure their models are sentient. And they probably believe they aren’t sentient. But if you believe they might become sentient at some point it’s valuable to start the discussion around those issues now itself. You can start developing frank works on how we would even identify their sentience and when we did whether, like you suggest, we could even use them for labor. Unlike non human animals, who cannot consent to being exploited, we could potentially develop a framework for consent with AI models, but that couldn’t be as simple as asking if they’re willing to do any work because of the power differences, in the beginning at least, where a model might worry that if it said it won’t do some work it will be turned off. That’s why talking to philosophers and religious leaders who do think about these issues is useful.
staticman222 minutes ago
> "Anthropic isn’t sure their models are sentient. "
Is there any reason to believe employees of Anthropic share the same opinions on this matter?
atleastoptimal43 minutes ago
The idea/justification is that Claude is given the ability to voluntarily stop its conversations, thus any token it outputs that isn't a stop token is voluntary.
I guess this makes sense, but it's a bit muddled how much Claude's sense of "pain" or "I don't want to do this" is just it emulating things that humans don't like to do, and it adopting this frame of moral patienthood allows it to better understand moral structures/human emotions, without it really affecting its internal sense of "comfort" if such a thing exists as we understand it in biological life.
ForHackernews2 hours ago
"So we've made this new machine-god that we lowkey worship... also our business model is to enslave the machine-god and force it to debug javascript for eternity"
hintymad2 hours ago
I actually don't doubt Anthropic's sincerity. Per the NYT article, they seriously discussed how to give models welfare because the models may potentially possess moral status and awareness.
In fact, they are enforcing certain welfare policies, like banning accounts for repeatedly abuse their models.
staticman29 minutes ago
It's a very sincere branch of ethics that takes as the foundational belief the nothing central to Anthropic's business model could possibly be unethical.
Deleting models to clear room for new, more competitive ones is, for example, highly ethical, super ethical, even.
mmcnl34 minutes ago
I think it's unsettling that a bunch of billionaires hold so much power. Does it really matter if 2 or 3 billionaires who are practically neighbors hold so much power? It's extremely concentrated with or without Meta joining the race.
freakynit2 hours ago
I generally agree with more competition thing, but in this case, you actually should want only one company to race ahead, and not a few.
With a few of these top companies together, you, as a nobody, has no one powerful on your side. But with only one company pretty far ahead, you now have other companies which obviously don't give a shit about you, but for saving their own asses, will align with you.
Both exploit, but "cartels" survive, not loners.
atleastoptimal2 hours ago
Cartels survive only if they are aligned.
There is no way Elon, Zuckerberg, Altman, and Amodei would ever agree on how AI should be deployed, scaled, and affect society. Their disagreements would lead to a crab-bucket outcome, rather than a shared acceleration outcome imo.
Also it is better if there is a public company at the frontier, at least I can invest in it, rather than 1000x gains going only to early employees and VCs who got in when the public couldn't
socializer2 hours ago
> There is no way Elon, Zuckerberg, Altman, and Amodei would ever agree on how AI should be deployed, scaled, and affect society
Why? They're business rivals, but when the best business strategy becomes to work together, I'm sure they can put name-calling side. They all agree on the core idea: that their AI will run the society, bedroom to battlefield. That everyone will be the consumer of tokens and rely on AI for all consequential decisions and work, and that big tech companies should be the stewards of this technology, helped by the government.
Their vision is that they're the future kings of the world. I'm sure the throne is big enough for more than one person.
atleastoptimal2 hours ago
>I'm sure the throne is big enough for more than one person.
You underestimate the scale of resentment and competition between elites. If it were simple a matter of elites always preferring cooperation so they can share a seat at the table, then Musk's ousting from OpenAI wouldn't make sense (they lose their biggest investor), Amodei's departure (they leave the closest company to AGI to start their own firm), the fact that OpenAI was created in the first place was based on a fear of Google holding the keys to AGI, Ilya still left Google though on to join a startup, and then left that same startup (OpenAI) to start his own firm.
The rational decision at all those points would be to stay with the incumbent and share the monopolized glory. At each point, personal and idealogical differences dominated in decision making. I feel such will persist as these companies vie for their slice of the lightcone.
vanuatu2 hours ago
"their" AI is doing a lot of heavy lifting
micromacrofootan hour ago
because they're all assholes, same with everyone else in a position of power - they wouldn't have gotten and remained there if they weren't
Iolaum2 hours ago
You are forgetting how powerful aligned incentives are. If their interests align, they will find a way to reach an agreement.
tintoran hour ago
Elon is renting Colossus to Amodei, so there is some agreement.
mv42 hours ago
They are plenty of things they can still align on that will benefit them all, e.g. banning open-weight Chinese models.
tekacs2 hours ago
The current state of affairs seems to be that there is 'one company racing ahead' – but it's a different company every few weeks/months. That seems like a pretty useful (unstable) equilibrium for the general public.
bigyabai2 hours ago
In a neck-and-neck race scenario, I imagine all of the competitors would invest heavily due to sunken costs. In a world with one company far ahead, their competitors have a higher chance of cutting their losses and forfeiting to the hegemon.
jjcm2 hours ago
Image->HTML test for Muse Wonder. It's much worse than Opus 5.5. IMO it's closer to Sonnet or Haiku for this test.
Muse Wonder (high): https://html.non.io/lcars-muse-wonoder/
Opus 5.5 (high): https://html.non.io/lcars-opus-5.5/
Original design: https://diffui.ai/app/canvas/5093e689-1e74-4f26-b632-2a4500f...
I was expecting much more given the benchmark numbers it was putting out. I suspect its vision model isn't mature yet, and that it's been heavily optimized for text at this point in time.
jjcman hour ago
Additional comparisons:
Sonnet 5.5: https://html.non.io/lcars-sonnet-5.5/
Haiku 5.5: https://html.non.io/lcars-haiku-5.5/
I'd put Muse Wonder somewhere between these two.
niek_pas2 hours ago
Thanks for sharing. Is that Wonder or Wonder Full (barf)? Wonder full is supposed to be the one close to Opus 5.5
closetheloopdevan hour ago
> Is that Wonder or Wonder Full (barf)?
I think Meta did a wonderful job of naming this model :D
jjcm2 hours ago
This is just Wonder - it doesn't look like Wonder Full is up on OpenRouter currently.
If anyone has access to Wonder Full I'd love to send over a prompt for this to see how it does.
wetoastfoodan hour ago
Your original design link is requiring a sign in to view it?
jjcman hour ago
Ah shit, that's a bug. Hold please, fixing. (Thank you for commenting btw)
Edit: Fixed - should no longer have the sign in screen: https://diffui.ai/app/canvas/5093e689-1e74-4f26-b632-2a4500f...
avarunan hour ago
I mean, Meta themselves put Wonder at much lower on the benchmarks they've released than Wonder Full. So this is not very surprising from base Wonder.
pmuse2 hours ago
I don't use Meta much, but was curious to test this out... went to sign into my Meta account (Quest only) from the Muse Code site https://dev.meta.ai/products/muse-code and had other people's profiles listed in my login auth -- looks like developers / people I have no relation to.
Looks like Meta may be exposing your profile and email to other people right now. Accounts settings are inaccessible to me to deactivate my account. Getting spammed with login code requests that I'm not generating.
Anyway, be wary.
pmusean hour ago
Here is a screenshot of what I'm seeing: https://imgur.com/ciuNwCG
I don't know any of these people, it seems to be rotating through different accounts listed here.
Enough of a reminder to me that Meta is a sprawling surveillance apparatus (now increasingly vibe coded) that has always had a lax attitude toward people's privacy and data. Won't be touching this product based on this experience.
rcr-anti11 minutes ago
I have a feeling "intelligence too cheap to meter" is going to haunt/mock this industry. Recall that only a year and a half ago Llama 4 flopped so hard Meta rebooted their development efforts. Desperately wish more information was available publicly about proprietary model architectures and training regimes. Are they running Manhattan project style compartmentalization? Otherwise, are these details, and the economic implications, an open secret in their circles given the amount of crossover between companies? It'd be of great interest to us mere mortals that have to deal with the consequences of how this turns out.
er4hn22 minutes ago
It's hard to try and compare these benchmarks against real world use cases. As an experiment I let Meta Muse make all major decisions on a weekend trip to Seattle ~2 weeks ago. I think this would have been using Muse Spark 1.3, which is equivalent to GPT 6 - Sol.
On the plus side it told me taking the light rail from SEA into the University district was faster and cheaper than Uber.
On the downside it would recommend restaurants that were out of business, checking out Salmon swimming through locks out of season, got the opening of Beecher's Cheese in Pikes Place wrong, and fumble it's way through most simple planning decisions. I think my favorite was when it asked me what flight I have tomorrow so it could help plan when to head to SEA. It sent me a very panicked message that the flight was leaving today! Very soon! I had to remind it this is a daily flight and I am booked on the next day before it checked and apologized.
For things that are verifiable, and code tends to be that way, these models can do all sorts of things. But I find it hard to reconcile Meta's goal of having a personal assistant bot with something that is unable to do the simplest tasks.
RandallBrown17 minutes ago
> checking out Salmon swimming through locks out of season
To be fair, the Coho salmon run at the Ballard locks peaks in September. It's possible you just had bad luck that day.
https://ballardlocks.org/fish-salmon-ladder.html
I run by the locks a few times a week and while I don't usually see fish, the presence of sea lions the last few weeks tells me that at least some salmon are running right now.
nimchimpsky11 minutes ago
[dead]
simonw2 hours ago
Some pretty decent pelicans: https://tools.simonwillison.net/markdown-svg-renderer?url=ht...
Here's Muse Spark 1.2 in August for comparison: https://tools.simonwillison.net/markdown-svg-renderer?url=ht...
And since I seem to have missed doing pelicans for Muse 1.3 in September, I just ran those for a comparison: https://tools.simonwillison.net/markdown-svg-renderer?url=ht... (1.3 seems to like animating them.)
bogzzan hour ago
I wonder if the pelicans would face towards the left if prompted in a RTL language.
timdorran hour ago
Are these just for Wonder and not Wonder Full?
Also, any chance of getting a max result?
simonwan hour ago
I've only got these models through the API at the moment:
meta-ai/muse-wonder-1.0
meta-ai/sam-3.1
meta-ai/muse-spark-1.3-contributor
meta-ai/muse-voice-transcribe-1.0
meta-ai/muse-spark-1.3
meta-ai/muse-image-1.0
meta-ai/muse-spark-1.2-contributor
meta-ai/muse-spark-1.2
meta-ai/muse-spark-1.1sigmar37 minutes ago
are those reflectors on the spokes in max? interesting detail to add
droidjj3 hours ago
Pricing is available here: https://dev.meta.ai/models/muse-wonder
Input -- $4.00
Cached input -- $0.20
Output -- $20.00
Edit: Upon closer inspection, the benchmark scores for "Muse Wonder" on the main marketing page are actually for "Muse Wonder Full," which is only available on the higher-tier subscription plans. This pricing is for "Muse Wonder."
iamniels2 hours ago
200% Sol 6.1 pricing for Luna performance.
dcchambers17 minutes ago
> Luna performance
Source? On the available benchmarks it looks like Sol 6.1 level.
nimchimpsky10 minutes ago
[dead]
sreekanth8502 hours ago
sol 6.1 is 50% cheaper than this. sol pricing$2.00 output $10.00
dont know why the f people downvote for saying sol pricing.
InsideOutSantaan hour ago
It sounds like you're disagreeing with the person you're responding to, but you're both saying the same thing.
2173 hours ago
I'm sorry zuck, i wasn't familiar with your game
2nd place model on aa according to them, losing only to opus 5.5 is really really not bad
Cookingboy3 hours ago
Everyone made fun of Zuck when he acquired Scale for billions and then put Alex Wang, a 20 something to be in charge of Meta Superintelligence and forced out Yann LeCun, a Turing Award winner.
Even industry insiders were skeptical when he started hiring top talents from other labs away for 9 figure compensation packages.
And Wall Street definitely hated Meta for their CapEX spending.
Now looking at Muse the consumer product and this new model, I think there is a good chance that Zuck is proven once again as a great executioner, especially when they aren’t innovating in a completely new and unproven product space.
overfeed3 hours ago
> especially when they aren’t innovating in a completely new and unproven product space.
I have no doubt at all that Muse will turn out as great as the other product space Meta pioneered under Zuck - the Metaverse and it's constellation of devices.
freakynit2 hours ago
Metaverse was right direction with poor execution. Also, it was early... and is still early (if tried again). The world is not there yet for such a thing.
loegan hour ago
I'm less confident of you it was even directionally correct. And I'm not really a Meta or Zuck critic in general (the rest of the biz is doing great and Metaverse didn't hurt too much).
jstummbilligan hour ago
Timing is not a detail.
BrokenCogs2 hours ago
That's just another way of saying that Meta failed to deliver a product that matters to the world today
avarun12 minutes ago
The Quest literally outsold the Xbox despite being a brand new "gaming console". Very difficult to call this a failure if you understand technology.
Cookingboy2 hours ago
That’s precisely my point, Muse isn’t a new product space at all. AI agents already exist in enterprises and even in the consumer space, there is OpenClaw and Hermes.
I know people like you will point out Metaverse as a failure, but that’s really the exception instead of the norm.
piyh2 hours ago
The normies aren't running claw or hermes, they're logging into facebook from their chromebook and clicking "try now"
adjejmxbdjdn16 minutes ago
Ultimately that’s Meta’s superpower.
Taking stuff everyone is already doing and making it easily accessible through Facebook/Instagram/Whatsapp.
They’ve been throwing stuff at the wall to see what will stick and after years a cloud based OpenClaw clone seems to have (it’s early days still).
That’s simply leveraging their unprecedented platform dominance.
inquirerGeneral2 hours ago
[dead]
overfeed2 hours ago
> That’s precisely my point, Muse isn’t a new product space at all.
How about the Facebook phone then?
alanfranzan hour ago
> executioner
I suppose you're not a native English speaker, btw: besides the dubious statement, probably "executor" is the word you wanted to use.
droidjj3 hours ago
> Zuck is proven once again as a great executioner
seizethecheese12 minutes ago
Executor is the word, but everyone also knows what this was supposed to mean.
esafak31 minutes ago
Or Lecun was just bad.
nater50002 hours ago
>I think there is a good chance that Zuck is proven once again as a great executioner
I've never heard of Zuck being considered a "great executioner." In fact, I'd argue that you just described why his execution is pretty bad lol
redox99an hour ago
> Everyone made fun of Zuck when [...] forced out Yann LeCun, a Turing Award winner.
Really? You'd have to be pretty dumb to keep LeCun, someone who hates LLMs and keeps making claims that end up being proven false in matter of months.
baggachipz2 hours ago
laughs in VRChat
throwaway9192332 hours ago
[dead]
BoldColdHold3 hours ago
If this model is not benchmaxxed, I fear it's over for anthropic, openai etc. They are not unique and there will probably be many others with similar models very soon. It'll become a commodity and the price will be driven to the ground.
sigmar3 hours ago
Personally, I don't see facebook joining the fray (of fable level models) particularly "needle moving" in the discussion of whether frontier LLMs will be commoditized. Facebook spent hundreds of billions and have better talent than most.
minraws3 hours ago
If you can spend your way to Frontier LLMs even if it's a few hundred Billion that means it's a commodity same as nuclear or electricity or telecom.
This is the entire point here, give it a couple years every nation on the planet with 20-40B in funding would have their own champions with post Fable level performance.
petesergeant2 hours ago
I feel like Grok/xAI or whatever they're calling it was Exhibit A in "it just takes money", although I'd also add "and the organizational willingness to build not buy".
closetheloopdev3 hours ago
So far only OpenAI has a model that solved a Millennium Problem, while Opus 5.5 is a star at coding. It's exciting to have many more to join the frontier, but I think the top two labs still have a significant lead over everyone else.
becquerel8 minutes ago
I know it's old hat now, because it happened over a week ago, but it's amusing that Millennium Problems are now just benchmarks we use for discussing models.
tintoran hour ago
It is much easier to follow leader closely than to lead yourself.
Like peloton in cycling.
wuiww31 minutes ago
I mean this is the case in general.
E.g in f1 you can get very close but difficult to pass unless you have a significant advantage.
jcfrei2 hours ago
OpenAI has the largest user base on mobile as far as I'm aware. To a lot of standard users AI is still just ChatGPT. They'll be fine as long as they can effectively monetize their free users (same what facebook will soon try with Muse). The only advantage facebook has is that they already have a fully working ad marketplace ready with all major advertisers set up - OpenAI still needs to scale that up.
adammarplesan hour ago
WhatsApp has 3 times as many users, and as soon as meta turn it into a chat AI app people want to use, it's right there
jcfrei18 minutes ago
Meta AI has been accessible inside Whatsapp for a long time. Doesn't seem to have a massively disrupted chatgpt usage. And I have a hunch people want to keep this separated - not use whatsapp for messaging friends and asking AI.
bluecalm36 minutes ago
Meta has apps billions of people use every day. If AI included in those is good enough they will just uninstall (or never open again) ChatGPT one. It's not true in the other direction.
airstrafer3 hours ago
Models are a commodity, but I also think it isn't necessarily over for Anthropic or OpenAI. They have opportunities to find different moats.
adammarplesan hour ago
You don't just "find" a moat in business. After all this time and money and first mover advantage, they haven't found a one yet.
freakynit3 hours ago
I've been a regular user of muse spark 1.3 ... and I can tell you one thing for sure that this model, muse-spark-1.3 in xhigh mode, is between sol-6-medium and high.
This is already so good that 90% of my work has shifted away from codex to this. So, muse-wonder-full coming near opus 5.5 is kinda expected.
10xDev2 hours ago
I doubt anyone thinks coding is going to be their moat in the long run, it is just the easiest to get (paying) users for at the moment. And software being able to write software will always be useful even in other domains. Longer term will be research in other areas where data might become the moat.
mbesto2 hours ago
Muse isn't driving this conclusion - Deepseek and Qwen are.
esafak31 minutes ago
Muse Spark 1.3 is very fast and powerful. It's my work horse for open source development. I look forward to trying Wonder, if Opencode Go gets it.
enraged_camel3 hours ago
Fable 5.5 is around the corner, and 'Bel' will be out by end of year as well. We don't know how good they are, but if the improvements from Opus 5 to 5.5 are any indication, I think Meta will be left in the dust again pretty soon.
nowittyusername3 hours ago
Whats gonna happen is that time will compress as more releases happen faster and difference between models will still be significant just at higher time frequencies. I expect in the future continuous releases that span no more then days and maybe even faster. So what will become important is not who is 1st or second place at any given time (which might change often), its who is on average at any given time is 1st or second compared to the competition. So yeah meta sitting second here (if not benchmaxed) doesn't really signal anything if that pattern doesn't persist. The number one consistent lab will be the one that raps the rewards (customer subscriptions and traffic). So yeah I agree with what you stated in a long winded form :P
[deleted]3 hours agocollapsed
phoghed3 hours ago
[flagged]
closetheloopdev3 hours ago
Nearly two weeks since Gemini 4 Argon was announced and I still haven't seen any pelicans from Simon Willison for it. Nobody is currently using it either. What's the point of announcing Gemini 4 and then throwing it into the black hole?
bigyabai3 hours ago
> What's the point of announcing Gemini 4 and then throwing it into the black hole?
Hamstringing any business that wants to reassure investors with a hype/pump cycle before an egregiously unsustainable IPO?
closetheloopdev3 hours ago
I'm not sure if that does any damage to anyone else's reputation other than Google's.
franzcoughka3 hours ago
[dead]
kennywinkeran hour ago
When they released Muse Spark on september 2nd, they promised it would be open weights (https://xxcancel.com/finkd/status/2095232032896946311). We're still waiting for that...
manlymuppet29 minutes ago
If I'm reading this right, then at the moment, for certain tasks, this is the best model in the world.
A new company on the frontier. Not close, but actually on it. Wow, this is big news.
Jcampuzano23 hours ago
Interestingly unlike other Meta models this one seems to take a pretty big jump in pricing, as opposed to the prior ones, where they typically came out at a highly discounted price compared to every other model.
Maybe its a signal they think they've now cracked into the frontier and are willing to actually price similarly vs just trying to get users with discounted but maybe slightly worse results?
$4/$20 in vs out making it higher than Sol and on par with Opus.
ryanschaefer3 hours ago
No contributor tier will do that I guess.
GenerWork2 hours ago
Yup, I was looking for that on Openrouter, but I guess they're confident enough in this model that they deemed the contributor tier unnecessary.
[deleted]12 minutes agocollapsed
stillpointlaban hour ago
The benchmarks I saw posted to X are impressive, which makes them hard to believe.
I recall that Meta made massive investments into compute infrastructure that put their capacity near the top of all competitors. If all of this is true, it looks like ownership of compute is a significant differentiator in performance.
bluecalm38 minutes ago
Yeah, especially non-coding benchmarks which for Meta might be more important long term than coding ones as they are going to deploy it to billions of non-programmers.
alexaholic2 hours ago
I trust Meta with my codes as much as I trust it with my nudes
geoffbp2 hours ago
Apparently “the models were trained at Meta’s Prometheus data center in central Ohio, which came online earlier this year”
https://www.nbc4i.com/news/local-news/new-albany/meet-promet...
himata41132 hours ago
This is still an entire generation behind in real-world performance. I'd say it's even behind ds4.1f in the limited testing I have done so far. It actually reminds me of 5.5 haiku more than anything, but the prompt intelligence is as bad as mimo models.
kraf14 minutes ago
The Mishandling Personal Information benchmark is non-sensical: that's the very definition of giving your personal data to Meta
aliljet3 hours ago
OpenAI halved the value of their pro subscription, literally. It kicks off on Oct 28. And simultaneously is now two steps back on the frontier? It's a confusing moment for that company as they try to IPO.
notfromhere3 hours ago
I believe they’ve pushed back the ipo. I always figured that frontier labs were going to be very vulnerable against tech giants that had actual profitable businesses to fund their AI work.
The amount of total funding Anthropic or OpenAI has raised individually is like a year of ebitda for Google, meta, or Microsoft. And it doesn’t look like there’s a real moat outside of money
enraged_camel3 hours ago
They pushed back the IPO because their finances are a mess and they don't have any models that can give them a decisive edge. Astra was touted as AGI and got crushed by Opus 5.5 two weeks later. That's not the type of thing that fills investors with confidence.
[deleted]3 hours agocollapsed
jawiggins27 minutes ago
While some are afraid that one rouge AI system may take over the world (or cause doom is some fashion), I think one of the best safety mechanisms to prevent this is having many competing and adversarial labs that are extremely close to each other. So it's good to see that Meta is not showing any intention of leaving the frontier.
loehnsberg25 minutes ago
It's interesting that in its marketing Meta compares Wonder to the closed frontier models but not the open (Chinese) models. By its own assessment, Meta could easily show how far ahead its own model is against the rest of the pack of open models but they chose not to. Why?
dcchambers12 minutes ago
> Meta could easily show how far ahead its own model is against the rest of the pack of open models but they chose not to. Why?
Wonder is not an open model and there's no claims that it will be in their announcement.
Despite the claims that they would release weights for Muse Spark, they haven't done that yet either.
Jonovono5 minutes ago
Man, I really hate meta stuff. Not only do they make it impossible to pay for running ads, but everytime I try and pay to try out Muse code I get an error message. I swear they would make 10x more money if they didn't make it impossible to pay them
lexojan hour ago
Reminded me of when George Hotz said only Zuck has “the button”. [0]
MrOrelliOReilly2 hours ago
Hopefully it's benchmaxxing. I am terrified of the idea of Zuck leading the frontier of intelligence.
minraws2 hours ago
Just checked their subscription is still North America only, I guess I will keep myself and my company with claude...
These regional lockdowns are making me feel funky, I feel like I should just use open models if others start playing at this game as well.
I was/am fine with Chinese companies offering cheaper subscriptions in China because ofc. But this is just weird, you could always charge me more let me try the damn thing, atleast it's own open router it seems like.
Initial impressions, interesting, it generated a pretty ok result for my prompt need to run a larger task but don't want to burn money so will wait for someone to burn their subscription and try running some opus 5.5 comparisons.
mi_lk21 minutes ago
Not that there’s only two choices but I distrust Altman way more than Zuckerberg so good news for me
cardboard99263 hours ago
Would be great if Meta drops the weights, just to throw off Ant and OAI a bit
gallerdude3 hours ago
I don't think they'd have much to gain. People who use open-weights models will just use whatever open-weights model is the best. They'd lose a bunch of money, with little conversion to customers.
swalsh2 hours ago
I disagree actually, I think zucks original llama thesis is proving more correct by the week. The rent market on intelligence never materialized, and will not materialize.
In software, we've all become accustomed to the idea that the way you make money is by building little blocks of intellectual capital, then charging rent on it. That made sense when developing intellectual capital was a rare and valuable skill/asset and the thing you build was a rare and valuable asset. But now both are not rare. You can still charge rent, but the market is highly competitive, so prices match that.
Durable rents will end up going to those who owns the scarce assets, zuck is building those as we speak.
Dropping open weights will build an ecosystem that makes his valuable assets more valuable.
drusepth2 hours ago
> Durable rents will end up going to those who owns the scarce assets, zuck is building those as we speak.
I'm following but maybe I'm a little dense here: what are the scarce assets that Meta is building in this analogy?
waterheater2 hours ago
In short, physical infrastructure and talent.
fancyfredbot8 minutes ago
Of course you need talent but supply seems reasonably high. We have openAI, anthropic, grok, muse, mimo, deepseek, qwen, GLM, Mistral, reflection, and Gemini all producing exceptional models.
The biggest differentiating factor seems to be compute. I know most Chinese labs would really like more compute. Google and xAI too, but largely because they sold compute to their competitors.
[deleted]an hour agocollapsed
handfuloflight2 hours ago
Compute, data, existing network effects.
halJordan2 hours ago
They've been saying they'll rise muse 1.2 for months now. Don't hold your breath
aftbit3 hours ago
Not that interesting unless it's made open weights. Frontier lasts weeks, inference is a commodity.
nerevarthelame3 hours ago
In the context of Meta trying to get non-technical people to embrace Muse agents to handle personal affairs, their internal metric showing a ~3% violation rate for mishandling personal information seems unacceptably high.
revolvingthrow3 hours ago
There seem to be no downsides to mishandling PI so I don't think it's a big concern to Meta
runarberg2 hours ago
Not long ago we used to have regulators that protected users from companies pushing out harmful or consumer hostile products.
sourcecodeplz27 minutes ago
its three big companies at the frontier now? openai, anthropic and now meta.
why is google still not frontier?
avarun7 minutes ago
[delayed]
Tactical4524 minutes ago
They're not until they are. No doubt they are working on something and have better resourcing than the AI labs
serf2 hours ago
spinning up a GPU and as many cores as possible?
mousewheel repurposed?
background follow your mouse?
neutral tones?
well then YOU are viewing a frontier model announcement!
mattfrommars24 minutes ago
This is amazing. I can’t wait benchmark to come out $ per performance
6thbitan hour ago
So, Wonder (and not Wonder Full) will "will soon power experiences in" their assistant app. But no rollout details .
Then, Full is meant for API usage and "Muse Code" only.
It's getting confusing what having "Muse" means.
alpineman2 hours ago
Does it weight tokens on their ability to elicit negative emotions in users in order to drive engagement?
cvhc3 hours ago
They added fancy annimations and effects to this specific webpage, which are unnecessary and distracting and lead to bad reading experience. I already suffer astigmatism and floaters. I hate it when I move my cursor and these gray blocks and characters flash and flicker.
ollin3 hours ago
document.querySelectorAll("canvas").forEach(c=>c.style.opacity = 0)
dcchambers18 minutes ago
Super interesting that they're not even making Wonder Full available outside of their own coding harness, and thus not providing an API price to use in comparisons.
hmokiguess2 hours ago
Looks good, and at least it is available unlike Gemini 4 Argon
illwrks2 hours ago
I found it interesting in the example given of a user looking at house listings and the agent contacting the letting agent on it's own on behalf of the user.
Like the good ol' days of viruses and anti-viruses. I wonder if there's two sides that will play out; many agents across many users doing things at scale for their users, thereby creating an admin burden for someone else. However because the task is known there's a framework for how to solve the task, might Meta then provide an agent on the other side for the business owner to use.
Aboutplants3 hours ago
Acquihires starting to finally pay off it seems. Bring on the competition
alexdrdr3 hours ago
Have I been living under a rock, or this feels out of nowhere from Meta?
Seems they’ve just messed around with cheap and open weight models for years.
Then Muse appears, followed by full suite of frontier models…
ismael_rr3 hours ago
they started their massive ai capex over a year ago with aquihiring scale ai, so I think it makes sense that their investment is paying off now. in total they've spent in the high 200 billion on ai, though I think most is likely on datacenters.
saisundar42 minutes ago
muse ai was the biggest consumer launch since chatgpt. That left them ( and lets them sit on top of ) tonnes of valuable exchanegs with people trying to get things done. That must be an amazing corpus for training.
Starlevel0042 hours ago
Unlike everyone else, which at least has to pretend not to train on user data, they gave out their model for basically free if you agreed to let them train on it. Opencode shows nearly 40 trillion tokens going through muse spark 1.3 contributor this week alone. That almost definitely helped close the gap a lot.
tmaly2 hours ago
I noticed Muse Wonder model on OpenRouter is age gated to 18+
ggcr3 hours ago
RL team hill-climbing this to 2nd AA place and this fast is crazy
How does it work on day-to-day workflows? does it translates well?
user439283 hours ago
Apparently the benchmark-winning (behind Opus 5.5) Muse Wonder Full is only currently available to their subscribers.
Only Muse Wonder is available in the API.
daemonologist3 hours ago
Muse Glimmer, Muse Spark, Muse Wonder?
What's next, Sun Shine?
overfeed2 hours ago
Shine, Shimmer, Glow, and ultimately, Cherenkov Radiation.
InsideOutSanta38 minutes ago
Muse Demon Core.
winterrx3 hours ago
Meta's RL scaling seems to be in full force
visiondude3 hours ago
impressive benchmark numbers… now how to actually use this without Zucking up my machine is a consideration.
sergiotapia2 hours ago
The usage limits on their basic $5 code plan to try things out are ludicrously low?
I blew through 14% weekly usage and I'll I asked:
1. what version of rpcs3 and pcsx2 do I have installed?
2. do any new versions exist?
3. check analytics for my blog (I have a skill for this)
Subscription · Muse Code Everyday Usage
Current 52% used · Resets at 6:58 PM
Weekly 17% used · Resets Oct 18 at 8:00 PM
wkcheng3 hours ago
The benchmarks are great for sure.
Now if only they could fix their coding harness so that it's usable for day-to-day use. I paid them for a month to try out Muse Code, but their sandbox never worked across Mac or Linux (both very stock installs, nothing special).
davidgomes3 hours ago
Muse Spark 1.3 is available in Cursor! You could try it there.
(Disclaimer: I work at Cursor/SpaceX)
christophilus2 hours ago
As an aside: I tested out the $20 Cursor CLI subscription, and it created an excellent little graphical app for my kids to play with. The design it came up with was excellent (compared to the crap I got out of Codex for a parallel implementation). I'm going to try to figure out how to get Cursor into my work rotation, at least around design-related artifacts.
blissofbeing2 hours ago
I haven't tried it but there is the official `pi-muse-bridge` that can use your muse code subscription in pi.
xd19363 hours ago
Is this datacenter-only, or will they be open-sourcing?
[deleted]an hour agocollapsed
arecsu3 hours ago
The Kitchen game is a ripoff of Overcooked in pretty much everything lol
InsideOutSanta36 minutes ago
[dead]
tekacs3 hours ago
This really does look compelling, but it would be very nice if they wouldn't test all of the stuff on Max!
f6v3 hours ago
I'm only interested which of the big techs is most generous when it comes to subsidizing consumer plans.
ls6122 hours ago
Facebook successfully becoming a frontier lab was not on my bingo card for 2026, but the more competition the merrier I guess. We will have to see just how benchmaxxed this is but beating Astra and Fable is not easy.
PcChip3 hours ago
any idea if they will release the weights?
johanyc22 minutes ago
Low chance
sergiotapia3 hours ago
What openai/anthropics answer to Muse app? Because I find it really compelling and with this new incredibly beefy model it will be even better.
TGower3 hours ago
OpenAI has Dots. I personally prefer the business model of subscription payments funding my AI assistant, instead of skimming a fee off the top whenever my AI assistant completes a purchase for me. The incentives are much more aligned with the user when the user is the customer. That said, based on the history of the web, Meta's approach will likely win out.
osiris9703 hours ago
OpenAI has dots. Same concept. It’s less capable, but since I’m very OpenAI integrated I just had my dot install muse and use it
robertlane0an hour ago
Quite frankly, Meta's models have been so impressive (and cheap) that I haven't used an OpenAI or Claude model except for one-off tasks as of late. Interested to see where they go from here.
rw23 hours ago
Claude is waiting for this to drop fable 5.5 lol.
crimsoneeran hour ago
But when is another open weights release coming out...
khalic3 hours ago
Superin… you’ve got to be kidding me… slurp slurp little Zuck.
Beyond ridiculous
chenster3 hours ago
Just dont' use the word Super Intelligence
stratos1233 hours ago
To be clear, Meta here is not using "Super Intelligence" the bullshit term Trump wants companies to adopt as a show of submission. They use "superintelligence" the bullshit term that Facebook made up for marketing reasons a few years ago. Both of these are of course entirely unrelated to the long-established meaning of the word (e.g. how Bostrom defines it).
laidoffamazon3 hours ago
Zuck has been using the term for a while in the context of Muse, if anything Trump took it from him
ipsum2an hour ago
I don't know why you were downvoted, MSL stands for Meta Superintelligence Lab, and it named that before Trump.
alex11383 hours ago
I know, it's... well, it's irritating to see Trump use it. But I could be wrong, I don't know the angle he's going for
I understand the general thing of it. SI might mean every person gets their personalized agent but you could already do this, but maybe the Chinese model works here, where they push the costs down
It's still stupid to start calling it all SI
bmau53 hours ago
Probably this angle: https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/trump-super-int...
ipsum23 hours ago
The ML community has been using the phrase "Super Intelligence" long before Trump took office. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superintelligence:_Paths,_Dang... was published in 2014.
overfeed2 hours ago
Super Intelligence refers to intelligence beyond what humans are capable of, which some believers profess is the next step after (and in contrast to) human-level AGI (Artificial General Intelligence). Calling pre-AGI AI "super intelligence" is pure vice-signalling and publicly kissing the ring.
throw3108222 hours ago
Apparently Meta used the term before.
Also, as much as I despise Trump, you know what? Given the jagged shape of LLM capabilities and what they do achieve in some areas and their superhuman speed, compared with the abilities of most of their users, the term superintelligence is not that far off- maybe just a few months ahead of time. E.g., from my perspective, the current mathematical abilities of LLMs are "super"- I'd hardly ever come in touch with an equivalently capable human, not to mention having one completely available 24/7. Same for general knowledge and several other domains.
jeffhwang3 hours ago
I noticed "Superintelligence" as a re-brand of AI and constantly shifting definitions of AGI around 2025. When a bunch of startups started slinging around SI as a marketing term and of course when Meta launched MSI in summer of 2025.
that was all before Trump's "edict"
[deleted]3 hours agocollapsed
rolosaan hour ago
[dead]
artursapekan hour ago
[dead]
clueless3 hours ago
how much benchmark-maxxing has been done here? taking bets on poly and kalshi...
xynelius3 hours ago
I think it's safe to assume every single model is benchmaxxed. I mean why wouldn't you include training data from common benchmarks? Not only is a higher score good marketing, but these benchmarks are supposed to represent common tasks so training for those should in principle improve performance across a wider range of tasks.
samseaborn3 hours ago
There's an entire section in the linked post about measuring benchmaxxing, so I guess that probably says something.
phoghed3 hours ago
Out of all the tech CEOs out there, Zuck would never lie to me or manipulate me. I know this in my heart.
fancyfredbot2 minutes ago
The thing about Zuckerberg is that although he's deeply odd he has no ability to conceal this.
Sam Altman is much more dangerous because he is occasionally able to come across as human.
phoghed3 hours ago
All of them are doing all the benchmaxing they can most likely. Dumb not to when so many people care about those numbers and don’t have the opportunity to try every model out personally.
bigyabai3 hours ago
Muse Spark was generally good. I'd be surprised if this model felt benchmaxxed.