The general theme of meta's approach across the board here is interesting - basically, they are trying to win in part by taking risks others aren't willing to. I can imagine they saw that all the success is coming so far when a someone is willing to cross a boundary that wasn't previously thought acceptable - from releasing ChatGPT in the first place, to things like OpenClaw.
So now they are actively distributing SDKs and to let people "hack" custom hardware integrations to their already risky AI agents unleashed on the general public. Giving agents abilty to control things in the physical world - what could possibly go wrong?
But here we are: so far the story is pretty much 100% "fortune favors the bold", and Meta is leaning into it.
Meta has never created anything successful since getting lucky with Facebook. Instagram and WhatsApp were acquisitions. Facebook Phone, the Libra shitcoin, and Metaverse VR were all flops. Jury's still out on the much-maligned "pervert glasses", but maybe those will sell.
Now they're trying a new thing. I don't know if it's so much "being bold" as flailing around for some new thing. They really desperately want to own a "platform" like Microsoft, Apple, or Google.
I don't totally disagree but I think you understate the level of competence needed to integrate and make successful the acquisitions. And they navigated the valley of death from desktop to mobile. And Threads is an interesting example everyone ignores that is 100% in-house and has actually established a strong user base. At very least, Meta has avoided the fate of so many others that came before - Yahoo, MySpace, etc and in part that is because Zuck made big bets at the right time that many people thought were insane (buying WhatsApp, Instagram etc).
> I don't totally disagree but I think you understate the level of competence needed to integrate and make successful the acquisitions.
Those take a huge level of competence and skill; I don't think the argument is "Meta can't do anything", but I also don't think it addresses "Meta can't invent anything new".
The glasses are great! Considering they have a light that shows when you're recording and it is NOT easy to disable, I definitely don't think they are 'pervert' glasses or spy glasses.
There are certain recordings where glasses make the perfect form factor.
zmmmmm · · focus · HN ↗
So now they are actively distributing SDKs and to let people "hack" custom hardware integrations to their already risky AI agents unleashed on the general public. Giving agents abilty to control things in the physical world - what could possibly go wrong?
But here we are: so far the story is pretty much 100% "fortune favors the bold", and Meta is leaning into it.
ForHackernews · · focus · HN ↗
Now they're trying a new thing. I don't know if it's so much "being bold" as flailing around for some new thing. They really desperately want to own a "platform" like Microsoft, Apple, or Google.
mococa · · focus · HN ↗
zmmmmm · · focus · HN ↗
throwaway314155 · · focus · HN ↗
petesergeant · · focus · HN ↗
Those take a huge level of competence and skill; I don't think the argument is "Meta can't do anything", but I also don't think it addresses "Meta can't invent anything new".
BenzeneDream · · focus · HN ↗
There are certain recordings where glasses make the perfect form factor.