193 points beardyw 3 hours ago 92 comments

whycome 2 hours ago | parent

It’s interesting that the only ads I’ve seen for Muse don’t mention meta at all.

nervai 1 hour ago | parent

if you go on meta.com there is not a single mention of Facebook or Instagram anywhere in sight, and those are their leading products and money makers...

the company's brands are toxic and they know it.

coliveira 2 hours ago | parent

And it's all by design, Meta and its founder have a long history of releasing products with security "flaws" that are immediately used by them to collect vast amounts of information about their victims.

jeanpah 2 hours ago | parent

Again? This seems very intentional at this point

reactordev 2 hours ago | parent

It’s 100% intentional, go look back at what they did with the Facebook app.

piva00 1 hour ago | parent

It's always very intentional, especially with Meta/Facebook.

That's their whole modus operandi, a privacy nightmare which will feed their infinite money machine.

Reading "Careless People" didn't make me surprised at all on how the company operates, it surprised me with the personal descriptions of how people like Mark Zuckerberg and Sherryl Sandberg actually are as humans. It scared me how most people at that level of wealth and power isn't too different from the accounts in the book, they're all seriously deranged people with a gigantic lever to impose their distorted realities upon the rest of humanity.

jagermo 2 hours ago | parent

I get the appeal of agents, I do. This is the future stuff we always wanted. But I cannot get myself to give one of these things access to my bank account or allow it to do price comparsion and shopping without oversight. Or access to my email or chat history.

I just do not trust any of them, not with my money or with access to my conversations.

reactordev 2 hours ago | parent

I’m in the same boat. After witnessing context rot and inference collapse, I do not trust any LLM with mission critical work. Not Jev, not grok, not fable, not Opus.

ctkhn 1 hour ago | parent

What extent does that happen for you? I have got very good results with self hosted qwen3.8 flash next at q4 and even with qwen3.635b on a laptop. I don't keep it running forever on every single repo, its ok to leave notes in agents.md and let it search that instead of the entire history staying in context.

reactordev 1 hour ago | parent

I’m not talking coding agents. More so agent harnesses and using LLMs for decision making

cowboylowrez 1 hour ago | parent

heh I got a completely stupid error from gemini about some apache configs, when I pointed it out, the llm apologised, said the line(s?) should look like this, then posted the same two lines uneditted haha

Aurornis 49 minutes ago | parent

The Qwen models, especially when quantized, can be really bad about just trying things and seeing what works. If you’re not watching all the tool calls you may not see it, but it’s kind of scary to watch them just bump into wrong decisions and backtrack.

They also have a bad habit of accidentally building URLs that hit Alibaba infrastructure, likely because their training environment had them use those URLs. If you haven’t watched the outgoing network requests you might be very surprised at what your Qwen agents do sometimes.

ehe12 2 hours ago | parent

Personally to me this feels like another classic case of starting with the technology and figuring out where to sell it as opposed to the customer experience.

It feels and seems too forced.

charliebwrites 2 hours ago | parent

The missing piece for connecting an agent to your credit card or other financials is financial liability.

If Meta/OpenAI/etc would guarantee they’d compensate you in full for anything that wasn’t supposed to happen —and had an established track record of doing so— it would make trusting agents to make financial choices easier

ehe12 1 hour ago | parent

“ If Meta/OpenAI/etc would guarantee they’d compensate you in full for anything that wasn’t supposed to happen —and had an established track record of doing so— it would make trusting agents to make financial choices easier”

lol… talk about delusion.

beardyw 46 minutes ago | parent

First you would need to establish some sort of interaction. Probably with the same AI that spaffed your cash.

the_snooze 1 hour ago | parent

What AI boosters don't realize is that we're not in the optimistic days of the 1990s anymore. We've seen that the prevailing tech business model is to offer convenience as a lure to lock in dependent users and extract value from them.

Unless these AI assistants are running on self-managed platforms independent of their developers, all I see is immense counterparty risk.

pelotron 1 hour ago | parent

Absolutely. If you need any signal to know where Big Tech's head is at, just look at how quickly they became arms dealers.

watwut 1 hour ago | parent

Big Tech's head is at "being evil is just being competent", "democracy is incompatible with freedom" (for me to do what I want). It is also at "humans are obsolete" point. And while Zuckenberg specifically does not have cool quotes, he was at the "who cares about genocide" and "let show weight loss ads to teenagers who we determined have low self-esteem" points in the past.

Notes: actual quote is "If you're evil, you're at least competent. And if you're evil, you're not bad. And therefore, maybe you're actually kind of good because you're at least getting something done"

edot 1 hour ago | parent

Quote was from Thiel FYI. https://youtu.be/B7yl7fEHeKM?t=840

ZnerflBerp 21 minutes ago | parent

Actual Demon Thiel

Aurornis 56 minutes ago | parent

> What AI boosters don't realize is that we're not in the optimistic days of the 1990s anymore.

Comments like this are in a different reality than most consumers. Most consumers don’t care about things like avoiding lock in to a platform. If the platform solves their problem then they don’t have any reason to leave it anyway. They’re not worried if their data is used to show them more targeted ads.

Topics like this show a sharp divergence between what you read on Hacker News and how actual users operate. We already knew that people who don’t trust Facebook aren’t going to suddenly start using Muse. They were never going to consider it. For the people who do actually use Meta products, which is a customer base counted in the billions, many will not have any problem using these tools.

ctrl-alt-zen 48 minutes ago | parent

I see a lot of validity in your reply, but I think there is still nuance in how these priorities are expressed. How would you compare this issue to the Flock backlash, for example?

SpicyLemonZest 42 minutes ago | parent

I think most people draw a strong distinction between privacy violations that are done "to them" and privacy issues with things they've chosen to use, even if they're quite similar from a technological perspective. I'd bet a lot of anti-Flock people have location sharing enabled on their phone.

balder1991 48 minutes ago | parent

This is only true as long as they don’t think about the future or do risk management.

klik99 42 minutes ago | parent

I asked my wife to not share any info with Muse and she said “Well they know everything already”. Well I was able to convince her not to with some stories about hallucinations of agents getting things horribly wrong as agents in the past, because the privacy concerns just didn’t phase her. Shes even more aware than most people since I’m very privacy aware. 100% it’s very echo chambery to claim that it’s not 1990 anymore. It’s like a historian saying that history won’t repeat itself because we all know what happened last time

lrvick 7 minutes ago | parent

My wife and I do not even allow Meta Apple and Google products or proprietary software in our home (unless owned by guests) because they are all predatory and endless alternatives exist.

shimman 27 minutes ago | parent

Most consumers absolutely care, why do you think the biggest bipartisan issue is a massive national backlash against tech companies and a clear majority of workers being against LLM tools in the workplace?

These types of comments just show what a massive bubble you're in.

consensus1 23 minutes ago | parent

That backlash is based on conspiracy theories about data centers using up all the water and the legitimate fear of AI taking their jobs, not anything to do with privacy.

shimman 7 minutes ago | parent

No the backlash is based on very real decline of material concerns, please try to speak in reality and talk to other humans outside of VC.

otikik 14 minutes ago | parent

Well they will start caring when their teen with image issues starts getting targetted beauty ads[1], or when they get pregnant, want to abort, and get directed to an anti-abortion center instead[2], and afterwards they get served "abortion reversal pills" ads[3].

Or when they are hit by any other privacy fuckup like that.

[1] https://futurism.com/facebook-beauty-targeted-ads [2] https://www.bbc.com/news/health-61320202 [3] https://tech.yahoo.com/general/articles/facebook-made-money-...

ai-x 29 minutes ago | parent

Me and 4 Billion happy users don't care.

HN must understand that they are not a representative sample of anything.

m463 8 minutes ago | parent

I read "the tesla files", a book about a whistleblower leaking a ton of internal tesla files.

They were discussing how tesla manages problems with full-self-driving.

It was interesting how this realm of problems was viewed.

If there was an accident while the car was driving itself due to some glitch, the police at the scene put all the blame on the driver.

The book had a different viewpoint. obviously there was a tesla bug in full self driving, and they kept their mouth shut.

meanwhile society/government doesn't even think of this and puts responsibility/blame on the user.

__MatrixMan__ 7 minutes ago | parent

AI seems to be an amplifier for other problems that we never fixed, more than an authentic source of problems on its own. In this case it's amplifying that we never really trusted the cloud to begin with.

We have a lot of deferred problems to go back and solve before all these dreams can come true.

awepofiwaop 1 hour ago | parent

Don't worry, I'm sure eventually you'll simply be required to give one of these things access to your bank account and that decision will be taken out of your hands.

malfist 1 hour ago | parent

When that happens, I'm sure banks will lock out secure local models for "security reasons" like an unlocked phone.

ctkhn 1 hour ago | parent

I see the value of the tool but I would never use it from Meta. Would need to be self hosted with a very structured framework and guardrails so that even my local model couldn't accidentally wire 50k to a Nigerian prince or whatever the latest email scam is.

shostack 52 minutes ago | parent

I see everybody freaking out about unfettered payment access to one's bank accounts and I keep wondering why people don't jump to the obvious solution of simply only giving it a single purpose or limited fund credit card number from privacy.com or something.

Am I missing something with the concern about ability to constrain the blast radius?

SpicyLemonZest 26 minutes ago | parent

I would call that kind of thing "a very structured framework and guardrails". You'd have to come up with entirely different solutions if you want the agent to receive payments or monitor your budget.

Octoth0rpe 14 minutes ago | parent

Man, I wonder how many facebook marketplace sales will be something like "In order to make sure you're a real person, before we can meet up so I can hand over this brand new macbook for $500 I need you to send me $10 electronically. It's really just to verify your commitment". With the right prompting, I'd be entirely unsurprised if Muse will just send over the $10, and of course the seller ghosts the buyer -_-

chasd00 4 minutes ago | parent

I've sold a few things on marketplace and have got some strange requests from buyers that i think are AI. I was selling a piece of exercise equipment that has a screen attached to it (rowing machine) and got a request to take a picture with a tape measure to verify the screen dimensions. The product is only sold with one screen size and it was plainly visible in the listing pictures too.

KetoManx64 1 hour ago | parent

You don't have to, there is a world of things you can do with them without giving them access to your email or bank account.

"Hermes, clone this android app to my computer, add this and this feature and fix this annoyance and then rebuild it and push it to my phone"

"Hermes summarize this YouTube podcast and push the summary and transcript to my Obsidian vault"

"Hermes check mg obsidian notes for when I last wrote a blog article about Neovim's integration with AI agents"

*Hermes, you have an API token that allows read only access to the Zabbix monitoring system, check that and then use the Proxmox API token that only allows you to do limited actions to reboot the VM that is having issues"

Etc, etc,

shostack 51 minutes ago | parent

YouTube transcripts are increasingly if not completely blocked now. It used to be great to grab content from long tops. I did not have time to watch but wanted to learn about. Now. The only way to do it is to manually copy and paste the transcript information or use computer use. But I cannot easily do it on my VPS it seems unless I'm missing a trick.

mrkn1 13 minutes ago | parent

You can transcribe in seconds on CPU for free. Check out yapsnap repo, its free and open source

KetoManx64 11 minutes ago | parent

I just have Hermes download the video using yt-dlp and transcribe it with a local whisper model using a local whisper server if the transcript is not available through the API, whisper base models works fairly well on CPU only servers nowadays.

f6v 1 hour ago | parent

My wife has scheduled a visit with a physician and there was a younger person in there. They legit said “haha I don’t know what it is” and used ChatGPT for diagnosis.

I have no doubt they would have no problem outsourcing everything to agents.

leptons 31 minutes ago | parent

That's some Idiocracy level bullshit.

edmundsauto 5 minutes ago | parent

Did they reach a good diagnosis by using tools to provide themselves additional information to process?

Or did they make a fatally wrong diagnosis that was only discovered because the old doctor whipped out their medical encyclopedias? You left us hanging without the relevant part of the story!

thenatureboy 46 minutes ago | parent

Sad to see such paranoia, agents can genuinely be an agent of good and positive change.

Last night I had ChatGPT go through an old email account and surface memories that I literally forgot. People who I have fond memories of. Yea I could have spent time querying gmail and digging but the agent did it in a way that really resonated. I don't care if Sama has my emails now. I do care about connecting with my past and enjoying the memories of a time long past.

Paranoid scolds of HN want the average person to be deprived of value like this for some reason.

SpicyLemonZest 35 minutes ago | parent

I affirmatively want that exact scenario not to happen, yes. I'm opposed to the automation of nostalgia, I don't think it's good nor positive.

tempfile 33 minutes ago | parent

> I don't care if Sama has my emails now.

I am perfectly prepared to believe you had a nice interaction with the robot. But this is an insane thing to say!

phoghed 25 minutes ago | parent

My email is gigabytes of garbage and a few useful bits of information that are useful and have personal relevance to me. You personally, dear reader, could probably read all my emails and I wouldn’t give a shit. I just checked my sent mails for the last few years, it’s like 90% sending absence excuses to my kid’s school. Google already has it all, so I guess I could just wait for them to get off their ass and make a useful equivalent to Grok Bot and friends.

gadders 33 minutes ago | parent

Yeah, just waiting for the AI-enshittification when they give it to the growth hackers to drive VC returns at the expense of utility.

liendolucas 27 minutes ago | parent

Sorry, no. This is not the future I wanted. I do not run any agents nor ever will.

I find all this is just the next-gen privacy violation, disguised obviously as: "Oh, WOW an agent in the computer is doing all this for me". Bullshit.

It seems that never is enough with these ever thirsty companies, they keep pushing the limits and surprinsingly a lot of people do not care at all nor value the implications of having an arbitrary process running and doing pretty much whatever the agenda of their creators are.

chasd00 14 minutes ago | parent

I made an agent to derive and iterate on a stock trading strategy for me. What I did was give it a virtual bank account that models your typical brokerage account. So my agent reads the news, financials, markets, all the information it can gather to decide what stocks to buy/sell and manage its portfolio. Then what I do is just follow along with real money.

I could see shopping being the same way, let the agent shop for you or identify good deals on things you want but then push them to you to make the actual purchase. Like you, I'm certainly not going to let an agent make a real purchase for me unattended and I doubt any merchant is going to have much sympathy for "my AI bought this by mistake".

lrvick 11 minutes ago | parent

I trust mine considerable, but only because I can run it mostly offline on hardware I own that lives in my garage. It baffles me that I am the only technical person I know that exclusively uses AI this way.

diskzero 1 minute ago | parent

I am a technical person and while I appreciate the challenge of buying the hardware, setting up the software stack and managing the system, I can't figure out any use cases that would justify the work. This is the main issue I have with Muse, Dots, etc. There just must be something about my routines that don't align with what these companies are expecting their users to do. I do take advantage of the investor subsidized coding agents, but it will take years of my usage of their services to come close to initial start up cost of my own system.

I am very curious as to what other people of using these agents for? Some of the use cases I hear; comparative shopping, travel planning, etc. don't appeal to me. Our people using them to manage family life issues like school schedules, meetings, etc? I feel like I am missing out, but I also am not seeing the greater appeal yet.

otikik 2 hours ago | parent

Oh Meta not giving a damn about privacy and security? Say it ain't so.

netless 1 hour ago | parent

been mostly using WhatsApp, should i be worried?

ryukoposting 55 minutes ago | parent

> should i be worried?

The question implies you already are. But yes, obviously.

nekusar 2 hours ago | parent

"People just submitted it. I don't know why. They 'trust me'. Dumb fucks."

-Mark Zuckerberg

jagged-chisel 1 hour ago | parent

They didn’t though. No trust involved. Hormones and emotions.

Today’s version of the platform targets just the right emotions to keep users “engaged.”

alistairSH 1 hour ago | parent

Are all of these just flavors of "the agent has the same permissions as the user"? Not that I want to trust Meta with anything, but I'm guessing it asked for "root" access and the users granted it...?

dcss_gardener 1 hour ago | parent

Yes, it is clearly designed to give you access to all of this intentionally. Its system prompt (which you can just read in the interface without asking) explicitly instructs it to act on behalf of the user, not meta. All of its memory files, skills, db schema, memory integration system etc are likewise visible because they went out of their way to add an interface for viewing them!

I don't like or trust meta any more than I always did but I don't see how they could have done a "better" job with this. These kinds of agents are inherently pretty risky IMO but I don't see how this one is particularly more than any others.

Playing around with it I really don't get the sense there's any hidden prompt contradicting what's visible. It's nearly gleeful at using the VM in ways that were not intended and likely against meta's interests. I feel like someone must have won a really interesting internal power struggle to get this thing out in this form.

jkingsman 11 minutes ago | parent

> I really don't get the sense there's any hidden prompt contradicting what's visible

It will happily disclose its entire system prompt (which is interesting in its own right, and worth a read) or pop a reverse shell for you

> I don't see how they could have done a "better" job with this

I generally agree -- the openness is great. However, from experiences both inside and outside of Meta, good execution, a hacker ethic, and transparency ultimately has very little propping it up when money is on the line. In fact, it could be argued that Meta has a shareholder obligation to do profitable things such that even the best intentions can (and usually will) fall in the face of corporate hierarchy and sales numbers.

I think they did a pretty bang up job with Muse (the lack of communication with first-time agent users around how powerfully and confidently they can make horrifying mistakes, and how careful you need to be with prompting, and how even that sometimes isn't enough, notwithstanding).

I also think it will inevitably be used to squeeze profit, and given Meta's history, I think it's almost comical to not assume that will involve violations of the spirit of privacy. (and that's assuming that a proliferation of "it deleted all my files" "it messaged my ex" "it leaked private info" doesn't poison consumer sentiment before it even gets off the ground)

oofbey 27 minutes ago | parent

Probably. But also the agents are finding flaws in the security model.

Also Meta is actively encouraging users to grant them full permission, insisting with all their marketing might that it’s safe, which they know is a complete lie. Hard to blame the user when they’re being actively deceived like this. Other agent companies are more reserved and say things like “be careful” but Meta is the opposite.

alistairSH 10 minutes ago | parent

I definitely didn't intend to blame the victims here, beyond trusting Meta in the first place.

As for security models, it's probably long since time to sandbox all data and apps. More like mobile devices. Allow users to toggle that all off so they can use their computers for development etc, but the default state should force apps/tools to explicitly ask for permission to any folder, other app, API, CLI, etc. And ask for that permission regularly (or rather, reset the permission after some period of time). Or something like that (I haven't given it a great amount of thought).

ChrisArchitect 1 hour ago | parent

Since this is mostly a collection of links to previously discussed articles:

Related:

Updates to Full Disk Access in macOS

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49937631

Meta’s Muse has a serious 0-day

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49802030

Unsurprisingly, Meta's new Muse AI agent blatantly ignores users permissions

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49893709

Maybe don't let Muse run your Facebook Marketplace account

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49875006

What Meta got right with Muse

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49946526

Muse – Meta’s personal AI agent

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49615537

sdcfgy 1 hour ago | parent

Isn't that Meta's entire product line?

DebtDeflation 1 hour ago | parent

>When one tech YouTuber put Muse in charge of their Facebook Marketplace sales, it sold his stuff way below acceptable rates

Why are we depending on LLM "reasoning" to negotiate a price rather than just having the user enter a lowest acceptable price deterministically?

f6v 57 minutes ago | parent

Because a lowest acceptable price probably depends on doing research and making a decision.

Sharlin 54 minutes ago | parent

That would require thinking, and thinking is the thing everybody seems to want to outsource to LLMs.

augment_me 26 minutes ago | parent

It involves cognitive effort to set a good lowest acceptable price. We don't want that, we want to reduce this effort that's what the tools are for

arshxyz 1 hour ago | parent

> Meta’s new general-purpose AI agent Muse sent him an unsolicited notification referencing a thread between him and a co-worker over Apple Messages. Aten said he never granted Muse permissions to read his messages

Can someone explain how this is possible? If an app can do this without Full Disk Access or a popup of some kind that's a way bigger lapse on Apple's part than Meta's.

etatester 37 minutes ago | parent

Reading the linked articles suggests that this is not possible, but Apple did acknowledge that the full-disk access grants you access to other apps (until the most recent update)

Typical "leopards ate my face" moment. You give AI (from Meta, nonetheless) full-disk access and then complain that—wow—it really meant FULL.

In a perfect world where you got nothing to hide, where companies don't sell your data and there are no hackers, even I would love to just hand all my data to Muse and have it be my trusted assistant. People who think we live in such a world are already doing that, evidently.

laweijfmvo 22 minutes ago | parent

I saw a theory, just a theory, that it may have accessed the message via its notification preview, which I think was similarly used to leak Signal messages recently?

fridder 1 hour ago | parent

This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. Why would you trust Meta with privacy and security?

labrador 1 hour ago | parent

I can finally relax and let a random number generator make my decisions for me

chadd 1 hour ago | parent

It's very simple. There is ZERO chance the worlds biggest advertising companies will refrain, long-term, from using your most intimate secrets, gathered through your many conversations with their AI personal assistants, to sell you things.

jagged-chisel 1 hour ago | parent

Or to otherwise coerce you into whatever funnel that makes them money

NBJack 44 minutes ago | parent

"That sounds like a tough problem in your relationship right now. Would you like me to order another Crave cookie for you? There's a special right now on free delivery. What about renewing your subscription to aitherapynow.com?"

airstrafer 48 minutes ago | parent

I agree with this but also think it is a first order consequence.

This level of unfettered access to your personality, lifestyle, and secrets allows for an unprecedented kind of manipulation and control. You could see it as a new kind of wealth transfer: not only will They sell you things, They will subtly manipulate behaviors of the masses via trusted agents.

phoghed 15 minutes ago | parent

Brother the biggest ad companies already own the platforms most people use for their communications. For over half the world they are the browser, the OS, the TV, the messaging platform, the map, etc.

I think to the vast majority of people having one of these companies run an agent platform is going to be business as usual.

winrid 32 minutes ago | parent

"I've gone ahead and placed an order based on your Google doc Daily Diary "Bad Dragon" entry."

matltc 51 minutes ago | parent

Couldn't pay me to use this junk.

Trying to think of a number that I would consider it, and honestly $1k/month wouldn't convince me unless

- I have root on device

- device is on its own vlan, fully segmented

- !(SIM || 5G antenna)

- no google/apple id authenticated on device

- terminate agreement at any time without cost

I'm probably forgetting/not aware of ten things I should consider.

Razengan 44 minutes ago | parent

Does anyone remotely interested in AI use Muse out of explicit choice?

Facebook is like Microsoft at this point: The thing your grandparents use.

Even if they make something technically superior for a while, like what the Zune was to the iPad, tHey'll never really be cool.

and they'll certainly never be trusted.

measurablefunc 30 minutes ago | parent

Every social media & AI company is also a surveillance company. Targeted advertising doesn't work w/o mountains of behavioral data aggregated across all of Meta's & Google's software "products".

piazz 23 minutes ago | parent

I’m pretty frustrated with Muse and the last thing I want to be doing with my free time is defending Meta, but this is such clickbait.

Point by point:

> “OMG you can jailbreak it and get it to spill its VM”

This is the whole point; any content on the VM is yours. It runs in an isolated sandboxed VM separate from stored credentials etc; this is effectively your own computer. You don’t have to trick it.

> It collects dossiers on your contacts

These are more text files that live on your private VM, alongside memory.md, etc. Do you want your secretary to forget every person you contact every day?

> It accessed Messages without full disk access

This whole story never made sense or was substantiated. Full disk access is an OS level security boundary; the user had to switch this on.

> It sold some guys stuff for too cheap and gave out his address

OK this one I basically believe, haha. Because this is the problem with Muse: the LLM is just too dumb to perform complex tasks effectively in many cases.

Havoc 5 minutes ago | parent

The model is decent and cheap under contributor version but no way I’m letting meta AI anywhere near anything that matters in my life.

> Zuck: They "trust me"

> Zuck: Dumb fucks.

hannofcart 3 minutes ago | parent

I understand that a typical HN user is very different from the average person.

However, surely by now even the lay people who have seen the testimonies before Congress, the lawsuits and the excesses by Meta execs over and over again ought to be atleast somewhat wary of handing them more personal data?

I think the average person has very similar self preservation instincts as the rest of us. So it can't be that. Which leaves the fact that there are lot of people who don't know about the above mentioned scandals galore that Meta has been involved in?