Thread

1. wxw · 1790702770 · focus · HN ↗

   The lines between Codex, ChatGPT Work, and Dots is getting a bit blurry to me. I think the target should be a remote agent(s) in its own sandbox with long memory, and all three are heading in that direction so why have the distinctions?

   Unless Dots is dramatically more capable than Muse, I'm also more bullish on Muse than Dots. I think Muse is a better consumer play because it can be forever subsidized by Meta ads and find distribution in family of apps while Dots is in a weird place between consumer & professional. From the release, it also sounds like you'll have to pay per Dot at some point which doesn't sound appealing.

   1. rolosa · 1790703468 · focus · HN ↗

      Muse is $0/$16/$80 vs Dot being $100/$200/$500 so yeah I don't think Dot is meant for casuals.

      1. gf000 · 1790753387 · focus · HN ↗

         I mean, I wouldn't touch anything done by meta if they were paying me that amount. I trust them the least with my private data - google does make money with via my data, but at least they have some resemblance of competency, especially when it comes to protecting said data.

         While meta can't get Facebook to properly load a video or a comment chain on their goddamn main platform.

         1. baby · 1790756546 · focus · HN ↗

            I would think Meta has learned a ton about cybersecurity and privacy + has quite established infra at this point. I would think twice before dismissing them based on vibes

            1. jeffgreco · 1790769447 · focus · HN ↗

               This is some worst case scenario behavior for an agent. Whatever Meta has learned, they don’t apply. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theverge.com&#x2F;ai-artificial-intelligence&#x2F;1001886&#x2F;meta-muse-ai-facebook-marketplace-security-concerns" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theverge.com&#x2F;ai-artificial-intelligence&#x2F;1001886&#x2F;...

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.