15 ms·

Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

643 points by root-parent 2mo ago

https://archive.is/20LOJ https://archive.is/20LOJ https://www.meta.com/thefutureisforeveryone/ https://www.meta.com/thefutureisforeveryone/

balls187 2mo ago
Isn't this the pervert trying to record me in when I am changing in the locker room? Hard pass.
shevy-java 2mo ago
These AI companies owe us money.
root-parent 2mo ago
https://archive.is/20LOJ https://archive.is/20LOJ
rufasterisco 2mo ago
https://archive.is/p1ehR https://archive.is/p1ehR The essay from Zuckerberg
- sammyteee 2mo ago
  God, it's a bit War and Peace...
- antonmks 2mo ago
  So many em dashes...
  - wolttam 2mo ago
    There really wasn’t that many and this did not have the voice of written-by-an-LLM to me And they’re not em-dashes -- they’re double hyphens.
    - vehemenz 2mo ago
      This is unneedfully obtuse. Double hyphens are a stand-in for em dashes in most contexts.
      - efromvt 2mo ago
        I think the context here is that em dashes are usually generated verbatim from LLMs? I haven't seen them generate a lot of double hyphens; I suppose the post could be laundering them to double dashes, but if you're gonna try to hide LLM prose just drop them entirely? [please correct me if I'm wrong and double dashes are also an LLM tell - genuinely don't know]
        wolttam 2mo ago
        My comment was trying to point on the inanity of calling out "so many em-dashes" on a post where it doesn't seem that obvious it was LLM generated. I added some of my own inanity with my remark about them being double-dashes, even though some people undoubtedly find-and-replace the em-dashes in their LLM-generated content something else to try and make it appear more authentic. But perhaps the best approach would have been to down-vote and move on.
  - deleted 2mo ago
    [deleted]
- ipsum2 2mo ago
  Non-archived version: https://www.meta.com/thefutureisforeveryone/ https://www.meta.com/thefutureisforeveryone/ since its not paywalled.
- riazrizvi 2mo ago
  Thank you! Okay yes well this manifesto is a contradiction. Yes good let's keep empowering ppl by putting AI into their hands, I love the opening. No bad we don't do that by handing you all our personal context to make these agents "work for us 24/7 to better our lives". I'm the agent doing that in my life, that's my fucking job. I will continue to use dumb agents that I direct, because only I retain ownership and sole rights to my personal context on which my decisions are based.
  - rufasterisco 2mo ago
    I don’t understand. The model is open, you can host it and use it without giving Meta anything. I’m not saying Meta is not eager to syphon data from users, but I don’t see how this happens via this specific product.
    - riazrizvi 2mo ago
      The intention is in black and white. The precedent of prior product design backs that up. The open models are great on their own but they are not the biggest part of the manifesto.
forestrywat 2mo ago
Is this "I'm losing so I think we should change the rules"? Because it seems like that.
- sodapopcan 2mo ago
  Similar to Altman saying "we should slow down."
  - amarcheschi 2mo ago
    or musk a few years ago, pause ai training for 6 months (so we can catch up)
  - scotty79 2mo ago
    OpenAI is not losing though. Fable is barely available and barely cooperates. Sonnet 5 is obnoxious model that's terrible to work with. GPT-5.6-sol competently gets stuff done. Just be careful not to ask it for impossible stuff because you might not like the lengths it's gonna go to get them done regardless.
    - sodapopcan 2mo ago
      Not to American companies, he said this after the recent Chinese release (I can't keep up with model names... Kimi K...3?)
    - VCFundedGenYer 2mo ago
      OpenAI is losing historic amounts of money. They are constantly at risk of bankruptcy or going far under. No AI company is winning.
- RunSet 2mo ago
  "They 'trust me'. Dumb fucks." \- Mark Zuckerberg[0] [0] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/09/20/the-face-of-facebook https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/09/20/the-face-of-fa...
  - 2mo ago
gaigalas 2mo ago
> Everyone will have an exceptionally capable personal agent that understands you, your goals, and everything you care about. "One machine for every man, woman and children of Zion. Sounds exactly like the thinking of a machine to me." Morpheus It's a joke. OR IS IT? Yes it is, don't worry about it.
- ben_w 2mo ago
  Still say Matrix 3 would have been better if the cliffhanger at the end of 2 had been that "the real world" was just another nested layer of the Matrix for those who rejected the primary fiction. I mean, why bother sending an army like that when one tiny robot could carry in a plague? Or, as demonstrated by Smith, when an Agent can virally infect and take over someone's mind while they're connected? Even in 1, Smith talked about the first Matrix failing as the humans rejected the paradise they were given, so it would've fitted perfectly into the cannon that minds who reject "the peak of your civilisation" got themselves a dystopia.
  - gaigalas 2mo ago
    We should consider if my use of the quote was really a hook for talking about the script or a metaphor for something else. I won't spoil it by explaining too much though, let our imaginations run free on this one.
  - krzat 2mo ago
    The "nested reality" twist was already used by the "13th floor" movie so perhaps they intentionally choose a different direction.
  - deleted 2mo ago
    [deleted]
  - staticman2 2mo ago
    I think Matrix 3 would have been better if it was more about humans taking control of the Matrix and trying to figure out what a virtual utopia looks like.
fsuts 2mo ago
Meta were fined by Mexico a few days ago so the timing today of a Meta doing good exercise is probably not coincidental https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2026-08-07/meta-ordered-by-new-mexico-judge-to-pay-567-million-in-landmark-child-safety-case https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2026-08-07/meta-order...
- asa123 2mo ago
  new mexico == mexico
  - hk__2 2mo ago
    I’m surprised Trump hasn’t proposed to rename Mexico "Old Mexico".
    - catlover76 2mo ago
      [dead]
root-parent 2mo ago
Is going to take it one day at a time, on being a less evil bilionaire :-) "Zuckerberg faces questions over why superyacht reportedly declined to help stranded boat" - https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/09/zuckerberg-superyacht-boat-alaska https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/09/zuckerberg-s...
- limagnolia 2mo ago
  Reading the facts of this incident, it seems like much to do about nothing. The crew are saying that the request came in on a frequency they weren't monitoring (and apparently were not required to monitor.) The Coast Guard determined it was not an emergency. The criticism lies with those who failed to properly fuel their boat, not the crew who didn't respond to a request that came over a frequency they were not on. They can't monitor every frequency. I am open to new facts being discovered that changes this assessment.
  - detourdog 2mo ago
    Where did you find these facts you read. In the USA a good Captain monitors VHF channel 16. This channel is used for establishing communication. To not monitor this channel is a dereliction of duty. I really doubt the USCG labeled a disabled vessel as a non-emergency. An immediate threat to life may not have existed but that is the difference between a pan pan and a mayday call. A disabled vessel close to land can easily wind up on the rocks and sinking.
    - limagnolia 2mo ago
      https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/10/zuckerberg-yacht-boat-alaska https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/10/zuckerberg-y... https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/article316824631.html https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/article316824631.h... I haven't found any source that states what channel the request for assistance came in on. But multiple sources are reporting that the coast guard determined they were not in distress.
ViktorRay 2mo ago
Comments here are surprising to me. I get folks don’t like Zuckerberg and his company and don’t trust his intentions… I don’t either. But this is an unquestionably good thing right?. The more open source software out there the better. And the more open weights or even over source AI stuff the better too right? More competition the better generally speaking I think. Unless I’m missing something and am getting this whole situation wrong. Please let me know if I am.
- kylecazar 2mo ago
  Most probably believe this is a good thing, but don't want to give Zuckerberg credit because a) he's had a profoundly negative impact on society and b) the strategy is transparent, he's trying to commoditize his closed rivals, it's not out of principle. I personally think more open models are a good thing regardless of motive.
  - cataphract 2mo ago
    Only the AI labs are really interested in closed models. Google, Facebook, Microsoft, ... they'd rather go back to doing stock buybacks and being ridiculously profitable rather than raising capital for all this research and datacenters. They only do it because they think they have to.
    - mcmcmc 2mo ago
      The alternative is ceding the leading edge to China and being dependent on them to continue releasing advances
      - skohan 2mo ago
        Isn't this meta release kind of a counterexample to that?
      - chrsw 2mo ago
        We did this with manufacturing and industrial build outs over the last 4 decades or so. It worked out very well for capital, not well for labor. One could make the argument we can do the same for AI. Let China build the models and we capture the value somewhere in the layers above. I think that’s a terrible idea but financially it makes just as much sense as offshoring labor and manufacturing, if not more.
moomin 2mo ago
The truth is all frontier models are closed. This isn't even an open source vs open weights thing. Even if you accepted that open weights are "open" the capital requirements for running your own Kimi 3 model are significant. It's not like gcc, where the binary just works well enough on random hardware.
- A_D_E_P_T 2mo ago
  Deepseek V4 Flash works on consumer-grade hardware, and it's extremely good.
- lumost 2mo ago
  There is no requirement to own the hardware. Even if you own your servers and GPUs - you would not own the power plant, real estate, or internet infrastructure to support it. It's trivial to rent all of the above components in a competitive market under different periods, you may simply rent the token output from someone who put in the effort on this as well. An open frontier model induces margin compression on training and inference prices across the industry.
- InsideOutSanta 2mo ago
  This is like claiming that Linux isn't open because you don't have a PC. Models can be open-weight even if you don't have the hardware to run them.
- rft 2mo ago
  I get that argument, but I don't think it is that bad. Open weights that are out of reach for local use are still within reach for groups of people or small to medium companies. Even if you only rent enough cloud GPUs to run the weights for a few hours, you still get to do anything you want with it. Worst case you can still archive the weights and hope for capable hardware to get affordable. At the same time this archive is the base line for a new frontier lab to start over if required. I see open weights as a pure upside even though I can't run the bigger models in my home lab.
- scotty79 2mo ago
  If all frontier models got opensourced 5 months after they were made available as closed it would be a great world. And it is a great world because that's exactly what open weight Chinese models are doing. They give you same capacity that was closed, just 5 months after they were released. I'm hoping that all software will be getting opensource clones on par with original software 5 months after the closed source software release.
bewareofscams 2mo ago
Thief shouts "stealing bad". Murderer shouts "killing bad".
- customguy 2mo ago
  And the cops just shake them a bit, waiting for the case to fall out naturally.
franze 2mo ago
i was wondering why meta has such a hard time with llm development its the organisational goal of that endeavour they are doing it in a phase of firing people so the goal of llm at meta is "to make people redundant" and no matter of HR/PR speak can change it antrophic and openai have the goal "lets create the future" whomever they hire and no matter how much money they spend on it, the goal alone will create very different outcomes.
- toyg 2mo ago
  > antrophic and openai have the goal "lets create the future" Thanks for the laugh, I needed it. They all do it for the same reason: to make a lot of money by selling it to companies who want to cut labor costs.
- paxys 2mo ago
  Here’s a personal story from back when I was at Meta that should tell you everything you need to know about how things get built and shipped there. I was working on a service that was a bit of a disaster. Terrible reliability, performance issues, needlessly complex and brittle code, outages all the time. And this was something that everyone using Facebook or IG directly interacts with. My first couple months were spent desperately trying to get it back in order. Once when I was in the middle of a SEV-1 my manager set up a meeting and said “you have been doing great work on the operational side, but we already have enough to put in that bucket on your PSC. Stop working on this for the rest of the half and ship one of <useless projects> instead, otherwise I won’t be able to save you in the next review.” I realized then that I had wrongly thought the team was collectively responsible for ensuring a good user experience, when really everyone at the company is individually responsible for ensuring their own success.
  - ergocoder 2mo ago
    Your story is an extremely typical one. It's even worse at older tech companies like Google, Oracle, Amazon, Microsoft, and IBM. Yet these companies are doing well by any standard. Sure, IBM is bad but it's still a $100B company. Who is even doing useful projects at these companies? Every story I've heard is everyone is doing useless projects for promotions. Maybe I just don't know how large companies work.
deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]
Zigurd 2mo ago
Have I fallen into a time warp? Didn't Meta have a head of AI who thought open models were the way to go?
- peezd 2mo ago
  I think they were all in on open until they started falling behind, then decided to go all in on closed source thinking they could build a frontier SOTA model; that didn't pan out so they are whiplashing back.
blueSky1989 2mo ago
My favorite paragraph from Zuckerberg's writeup: """ [...] it is surprising that the discourse from many developing AI is so filled with doom. I do not understand why anyone who believes that AI will eliminate most jobs and much of humanity's relevance would rush to build that future. The notion that AI is so dangerous that the only safe path is an extreme concentration of power seems inherently problematic. Historically, hoping that an absolute power will benevolently provide for humanity if sufficiently enlightened has not led to safe or positive outcomes. """
- paxys 2mo ago
  Now go read Zuck’s comments on AI when he fired 8000 employees earlier this year.
  - frenchtoast8 2mo ago
    Any particular quote you want to share?
    - paxys 2mo ago
      It is one page of text. I think you can manage to read it and come to your own conclusions without relying on clickbait headlines and out of context quotes. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/23/technology/meta-layoffs.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/23/technology/meta-layoffs.h...
      - frenchtoast8 2mo ago
        You clearly have an opinion you want to share, otherwise you wouldn't have written anything. Instead of just outright saying what you think, you are being vague. Why? It's true that Meta laid off a lot of people, and blamed refocusing on AI as the reason, but I still don't see how that somehow contradicts GP's quote above.
        xdavidliu 2mo ago
ChrisArchitect 2mo ago
Discussion on sources: The Future Is for Everyone – The Path to a Positive AI Future https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49241728 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49241728 Meta Muse Glimmer – open weights 30B local coding model https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49241679 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49241679
VCFundedGenYer 2mo ago
Talk is cheap. Do it. Ollama has been abandoned since 2023.
- gamblor956 2mo ago
  Ollama was updated within the past month?
andrewstuart 2mo ago
>> promoting his vision of “personal superintelligence” What personal vision did Zuckerberg ever get right?
sleepybrett 2mo ago
don't care, he left a woman and a child to die at sea.
gdiamos 2mo ago
How big is the open model? 30B?
juleiie 2mo ago
[flagged]
BetterAntispam 2mo ago
[dead]
imPndy 2mo ago
I have to ask, is this "returns to open models" even correct, considering from a quick look the facebook huggingface collections[0] has been actively releasing different kind of models almost monthly for long time now, possibly even some actual open source ones (looks like Sam 3D had a dataset collection, but didnt look more into it). Maybe they are not as noteworthy as the recent release, maybe they are too niche for general audience, but its not like they just stopped releasing open weight things and this is their big return, unless i am missing something? [0]: https://huggingface.co/facebook/collections https://huggingface.co/facebook/collections
bhewes 2mo ago
Hahaha calling Zuckerberg a negative externality on the world is hilarious you guys are too much.
- bhewes 2mo ago
  [flagged]
lvl155 2mo ago
All the money in the world and Zuck can’t buy anything worthwhile in AI. The problem at Meta is really Zuck taking interest in AI. Perhaps the adults should steer him back toward VR unless they all left.
twright 2mo ago
This paragraph is wild. > As a thought experiment, imagine only one person had a superintelligent lawyer. They would have an unfair advantage in court -- even if they were wrong on the merits. That would lead to a worse society. But now imagine everyone has a superintelligent lawyer. In this case, justice would be carried out much more fairly and efficiently than it is today when there is often an imbalance in skills and resources in litigation. This would only be true in a vacuum. Ignoring several leaps of progress where it would suddenly be allowed for an AI to represent one in court (imagine the size of the context window) and you could also call it from prison. That is not what is imbalanced about the US court system. Whoever has more money can drown someone in court filings and court fees and then drop their case financially ruining someone. It's also funny how the interest of "AI for everyone" only extends to the national interest but I guess he's got to make sure he stays in good graces with the current administration.
- PunchyHamster 2mo ago
  Yes but if lawyer was "just a bit of AI" you can run at fraction of the cost of hiring law firm, you couldn't just drown them as easily. > Whoever has more money can drown someone in court filings and court fees and then drop their case financially ruining someone. and where the money is going ? to the lawyers...
  - nadermx 2mo ago
    or in this case, to the AI company who runs the lawyer.
  - edukite 2mo ago
    Only in a world were AI companies can subsidize AI usage indefinitely. In reality AI is not cheap and larger & more potent model it's usage costs is more expensive
- afro88 2mo ago
  I'm not a fan of Zuckerberg in the least, but one area a super intelligent lawyer would be fine at is being drowned in court filings and paperwork The bigger problem with his argument IMO is that even with open models, it's still the person or organisation with the most money / access to GPU compute winning. They run the larger model (or collection of models), they can process more tokens through them in the same amount of time etc
mrcwinn 2mo ago
This is what losing looks like.
nerevarthelame 2mo ago
I prefer open models. But in his essay, Zuckerberg's broader picture of the future is not one I want to embrace: everyone with a personal agent that has information on and involvement with every aspect of our lives, including our relationships and hobbies. Like, his daughter loves to bake, so his AI agent chooses recipes and orders ingredients - as if though those aren't enjoyable and meaningful parts of cooking. Another example Zuckerberg gives is an LLM analyzing his sleep patterns. Do you need an AI to tell you if you're fucking exhausted every day? Is that analysis somehow going to give you more time to sleep? It's a technocratic fairy tale founded on the idea that modern problems are driven by a lack of personal analysis rather than external pressures that are often systemic and out of our control. So far, LLMs have made a lot of those systemic issues worse: concentrating more wealth in a smaller number of people's hands, increasing consumer electricity and electronic prices, etc.
- dofm 2mo ago
  This is alas not only his imagining, is it: https://www.businessinsider.com/ai-parenting-debate-sam-altman-2026-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/ai-parenting-debate-sam-altm... I think you have to pick your battles here. Is this weirdo optimised-human future going to happen? Maybe, maybe not. I hope not. But if it does I'd rather it happened with compute in my house, and I don't even have kids to worry about.
dofm 2mo ago
godzilla_let_them_fight.gif More seriously, I am glad if this has become a battleground again. Not least because the only way out of the bubble economy is to at least try to deflate it before it explodes. A little animation of the idea that open weights can be an American competition might also fend off the idea that the government should be the bag holder for OpenAI and Anthropic, and prevent them aligning with the administration's current '50s nostalgia FUD about communists.
mtoner23 2mo ago
Why would someone good at running a social media website be good at managing and developing ai frontier models
- chrisra 2mo ago
  Because they have extra money to do whatever they want with. And data to use it on? Not that that is sufficient, but it helps.
ungovernableCat 2mo ago
From Zuck's own words "we will resume releasing some open source models soon" Why did you pause releasing them in the first place? Why release only some? Pushes for export controls on China who have released open weights on much more powerful models than Meta (and I believe that trend's not changing any time soon). I guess open models are bad if they're communist. The entire essay has not one mention of the Metaverse, that little thing they spent $80b on and rebranded the whole company around. As usual, the only centralised power Zuck hates is one that isn't in his own hands.
- gorgoiler 2mo ago
  I can’t quite parse what you’re saying in your second paragraph, but if you are saying “[Zuckerberg then] pushes for export controls on China” then that’s different to what he’s saying, namely: “I do not believe restricting access to foreign open source models is an effective solution.”
  - ungovernableCat 2mo ago
    "Export controls on silicon have been successful for slowing the progress of foreign labs during this critical period, so it is the right strategic move to continue those." https://www.meta.com/thefutureisforeveryone/ https://www.meta.com/thefutureisforeveryone/
bushido 2mo ago
I think something that doesn't get said enough is Meta did, albeit intentionally kick off the origin of the open source race back in 2023 with the release of llama. I'm not a big fan of meta in general, but they've done enough good, and it's possible that it was intentional as well. I don't know, I wasn't in the rooms, and I think it's worth giving them some reasonable doubt. No one is purely good, and no one is purely evil. This is net good regardless.
- xandrius 2mo ago
  Enough good? You are joking, right? They also kick off a ton of other nefarious things we are still paying for.
  - dozerly 2mo ago
    Yea this has to be a joke. They are one of the worst, no-good companies of the modern day and age
    - objektif 2mo ago
      There are definitely evil ones but there are okish ones as well.
      - andrewchilds 2mo ago
        read Careless People by Sarah Wynn-Williams and see if you still consider them “okish”.
        alex1138 2mo ago
        That book is hilarious. In a bad way. (Not the book. I mean that it's a bit tragic) Zuck refuses to meet with WORLD LEADERS in the morning because he's tired from the night before. Kaplan can't even find certain countries on a map (head of global policy). Zuck changes a speech midway through to talk about "We'll give Facebook to refugees" The internet is this vast, intellectual (in the academic, university, .edu sense), cypherpunk, government/activist... thing. It should be interesting. Instead the best we have for social networking is Mark "they trust me; dumb fucks" Zuckerberg and you getting banned from the site at any time for any reason
KPGv2 2mo ago
> they've done enough good well minus driving teenagers to suicide by helping advertisers target girls with poor body image issues, helping launch psyops campaigns to destroy democracy, helping fascist regimes murder their citizens for wrong think, etc.
Razengan 2mo ago
Ah the we can't win so whine about the playing field And they can't win because nobody smart wants to work there for long
MuseSpark 2mo ago
Glad to see us in HN
cmiles8 2mo ago
If you believe, as an increasing number of folks do, that LLMs are basically commoditized at this point or will be soon then there really isn’t a path forward for non open models. There simply isn’t any value in the models and only in the compute to run them and potentially some higher-order coordination layers. That’s very bad for the big model labs that banked their future on the opposite, but there just doesn’t seem to be a viable path forward on that approach anymore. Meta hasn’t been the best global citizen for most of its life, but there may be some mild redemption if it becomes a source of strong open models.
- cdata 2mo ago
  I strongly prefer a world where open models "win," that said... I don't understand how we will sustain an ecosystem of open models like the one that exists today. My thoughts go down this path every time I try to put the pieces together: - Many open models depend on high quality frontier models as a distillation input - US closed frontier models drive China's open model strategy despite the business model for open models being somewhat fuzzy - What is the business model that benefits from open weights, exactly? How do their vendors recoup infrastructure and training costs? I would be grateful to be enlightened on this topic.
  - cmiles8 2mo ago
    Wouldn’t be that different from open source software, which has been very successful in many circles. You make money from value-add on top of the models not the models themselves.
    - redox99 2mo ago
      Yeah but open source is often a few guys working on their free time, or a large company open sourcing libraries that they wouldn't be able to sell anyway, or donations from corporations that are at best in the order of a million dollars. For frontier models you have players investing billions.
    - solenoid0937 2mo ago
karim79 2mo ago
I'm not an expert on this. But given that there is a forthcoming movie about his asshattery which is to be released in October I would simply classify this as a meltdown. Call it whatever you want. I think it's a sign of resignation, to some extent. "Hey we're doing AI but we're not doing AI" and blah blah ethics. I'm sure meta will save the world with their ads.
mattsears 2mo ago
Ha ha, basically your models couldn't cut it Mark, so might as well open the source and pretend you're the man of the people. What a joke.
analog31 2mo ago
Great, we can use open or closed models, now that the money is in running the models through their data centers either way.
aabhay 2mo ago
The relevant paragraph about Meta’s commitment to open source is here, and the statement is significantly less confident than news is reporting > • Open source is a positive and important force for empowering people and preventing centralization that is detrimental for both safety and the economy. Meta continues to be strongly supportive of open source, including open source AI models. The current open source ecosystem is strong, and we think it would be a mistake to restrict it. Now that Meta Superintelligence Labs are up and running, we will resume releasing some open source models soon. “We will resume releasing some open source models soon”??? That’s basically the most ambiguous non commitment ever. Even before legal team watering it down I can’t imagine what the intent is here. We are also going to release open models for things maybe or maybe not kinda? Absolutely zero conviction. And moreover, this explicitly frames the open source ecosystem as something Meta is not a part of.
- jefftk 2mo ago
  > “We will resume releasing some open source models soon”??? That’s basically the most ambiguous non commitment ever. I mean, they released another one today: https://research.meta.ai/blog/introducing-muse-glimmer-open-agentic-model https://research.meta.ai/blog/introducing-muse-glimmer-open-...
Havoc 2mo ago
He released a good open weights model. On that basis he gets to take a few potshots…
mekpro 2mo ago
why so much hate on this ? Meta releases open Model and it is competitive and confirms the direction, what could we ask more !!
darepublic 2mo ago
It's ironic Zuckerberg would criticize anyone for closing stuff up. Facebook being the classic walled garden. That said the enemy of my enemy etc.
krater23 2mo ago
Is today Opposite Day? Or April 1th?
brokegrammer 2mo ago
Attack anything you can't compete against
1vuio0pswjnm7 2mo ago
10 Aug 2026 14:49:05 UTC | Mark Zuckerberg Lays Out New AI Vision in 6,500-Word Essay | https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/mark-zuckerberg-lays-out-new-ai-vision-in-6-500-word-essay-966e9a56 https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/mark-zuckerberg-lays-out-new-ai-... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49244449 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49244449 10 Aug 2026 17:15:20 UTC | Zuckerberg Posts 6,500-Word Essay About Giving Everyone AI Superintelligence | https://www.404media.co/mark-zuckerberg-posts-deranged-6-500-word-essay-about-giving-everyone-ai-superintelligence/ https://www.404media.co/mark-zuckerberg-posts-deranged-6-500... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49246721 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49246721 10 Aug 2026 18:18:20 UTC | Zuckerberg makes a case for unleashing Pandora's box | https://www.theverge.com/tech/977395/meta-mark-zuckerberg-superintelligent-ai-ramble https://www.theverge.com/tech/977395/meta-mark-zuckerberg-su... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49247557 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49247557
mhviraf 2mo ago
Not a Meta fan per say but their contribution to open source has always been great. Examples include PyTorch (has had huge impact on velocity of ML research), Llama models, segment anything, many notable research papers from FAIR, etc. I never thought I would say this but I’m with Zuck on this. The call for slowing down AI development for safety seems like an excuse for reducing opex for training better models to stay relevant.
mvkel 2mo ago
They launched their model a week ago, completely closed, selling an endpoint. Then when nobody bought, they "open" sourced it. Ok.
- CodeCrusader 2mo ago
  +1
BrenBarn 2mo ago
What a load of insincere hogwash. If Zuck wanted to dilute the power of large institutions he has several billion ways to do it other than making limp gestures in the direction of open source. The problem is that even if you take him at his word here, he's only willing to do more good and not less harm.
jillesvangurp 2mo ago
Meta's problem is not models but doing something productive with them. Meta never really nailed that. Just like Google is struggling with this. And MS. It's the classic disruptors dilemma. In order to embrace the new thing, they have to let go of the old thing that has made them rich. If you look beyond the somewhat tone deaf leadership, the somewhat stale business model of social media, etc. Meta doesn't actually have a whole lot to bring to the table. They probably managed to hire/keep some AI talent with the help of large salaries. But they are knee deep into having made big figure commitments to data center capacity with nothing to show for it yet. Their AI effort is increasingly looking like a repeat of their failed metaverse strategy. A lot of expensive bets that are not paying off. It all boils down to Mark Zuckerberg not being the visionary and innovator he thinks he is. Like many billionaires he confuses him lucking out in his twenties with some magical leadership qualities or brain capacity he has. And the reality of course is that he lucked into building a nice social networking thingy not hindered by too much technical skill or deep scientific knowledge. Granted, he did that well. But that's 20 years ago. And then he added to that with some strategic acquisitions of stuff that others did (Whatsapp, Instagram, etc) that you might label as spectacularly good acquisitions for Meta. But he's not going to reinvent AI. He's way out of his depth there. A bit of a technical lightweight without much academic credentials or much of a vision. His "vision" here is copying what the Chinese and others are already doing well. What's lacking is a vision as to how his version of that is going to be any better and win over all those users. Or indeed a vision as to what people are going to do with all this AI. Apparently there is no vision for that in the context of Meta's own products. This is a company going through the motions of being an AI company without any vision whatsoever as to why they are doing that other than a fear of missing out.
dspillett 2mo ago
Is this like when they declared E2EE was the future and those not doing it were behind, but as it turned out bad for the bottom line¹² such features are getting rolled out of their properties? U-turn when meta finds an inconvenience due to open weights in 3… 2… … … -------- [1] reduced advertising revenues due to not being able to target based on message traffic, and reduced data scraped for training purposes [2] and possibly in part due to behind-the-scenes pushback from government/police/other interests?
macwhisperer 2mo ago
I feel like all the ppl complaining itt don't even run open weight models.. wahh billionaire bad is true, but you are missing the forrest for the trees.. they are literally bending the knee and ur mad about it? it literally means local models won.
pythonRon 2mo ago
It won't last. Remember (when was it? Last year?) when Musk went after Microsoft for turning Open AI into proprietary closed code? We never know what's going on behind closed doors, but something changed, Musk backed off, and nothing changed.
pythonRon 2mo ago
God missed his chance when all the billionaires went up in a rocket a few years ago.
m00dy 2mo ago
$META is so underrated.
easygenes 2mo ago
In the lead-up to the Grok 4.5 release, the CEO of HuggingFace was petitioning Elon Musk to open the weights. It’s odd to me that he didn’t accept, as the model is at a similar competitive level to Muse 1.2. It would have been good PR and essentially zero risk, while getting ahead of Meta who seemed likely to go back to shipping weights soon.
AvAn12 2mo ago
Open weight != open source
finnjohnsen2 2mo ago
We don't trust you Zuck but we'll take it. Thanks.
oybng 2mo ago
dumb fucks: the thread
naruhodo 2mo ago
This[1]: > This has the potential to begin a new era of personal empowerment where individuals can use this powerful new capability to reach their full potential, pursue their interests, and improve their lives and the world more than ever before. Plus this[2]: > Since 2019, thousands of deceptive advertisements on Facebook have used the likeness of the highly prominent businessman to promote scams, racking up thousands of victims, according to the suit. > The billionaire's legal team argues that Meta's artificial intelligence tools optimised and personalised fraudulent ads before distributing them, thereby making Meta an active participant, rather than a mere intermediary. Make for a fun juxtaposition today. [1] https://www.meta.com/thefutureisforeveryone/ https://www.meta.com/thefutureisforeveryone/ [2] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-11/andrew-forrest-meta-scam-ads-case/107025146 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-11/andrew-forrest-meta-s...
DivingForGold 2mo ago
[flagged]
cyanmoonx 2mo ago
Zuck copied MySpace, bought instagram. Those aren’t his ideas His own ideas always flop. Zuck thought he was gonna make a VR MMO at your job. That is basically where his head is at. Smart glasses might even be a thing, but not coming from Zuck Everything under his direction is a flop. Basically one of the biggest idiots in all of tech.
hno8a34nwn 2mo ago
Learned something, upvoted
sebastianconcpt 2mo ago
Good for Mark. Healthy move for all.
lasky 2mo ago
Mark is not doing this for the money or power. Mark genuinely cares about your mental health. He does not want to rewire your brain to be dependent on his models, like he did with FB/IG. We can see it in his empathic eyes.
deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]
plainviewinstru 2mo ago
being anti distillation is inherently being anti free markets
Danox 2mo ago
Meta/Zuckerberg realized belatedly that AI models, which are currently in the process of rapidly becoming just a commodity product and that above all else is probably the main reason why Zuckerberg wrote that 6000 word term paper recently because he’s planning on pivoting away from Meta’s current money wasting AI approach. He’s prepping Wall Street because Meta’s is going to layoff thousands of people in the coming months.
benrutter 2mo ago
To give him credit, it's amazing that Mark Zuckerberg managed to take an easily defensible position like "we shouldn't allow AI to be owned by a couple of tech monopolies" and still manage to find so many individual points and arguments to be completely clueless on. My personal favourite: > Before the industrial revolution, 90% of people were farmers growing food to survive. Advances in technology steadily freed much of humanity to focus less on subsistence and more on the pursuits we choose. Over a long enough time span, the industrial revolution has certainly improved living standards but the industrial revolution itself was l, for many, an absolutely horrific time to live. Life expectancies in cities plumetted and we saw the birth of workhouses. It's such an odd example to choose for trying to suggest "technology x will help everyone in a non-complicated way". He might as well have picked the atomic bomb.
- overgard 2mo ago
  Yeah, using the "industrial revolution" as a positive is a weird argument in general. Sure, the end result was, eventually, an improvement, but the process took decades and was horrible for most involved. If this "revolution" (I don't think it is) takes as long as the industrial revolution, I'll be like 70-80 before the supposed benefits accrue.
  - wvbdmp 2mo ago
    I mean it’s not a particularly techno-optimistic idea, it’s pretty common. Likewise, the French Revolution is widely celebrated inside and outside France, but at the time in the place it was bad bad.
    - stymaar 2mo ago
      And it stayed bad for almost a century (it only started to normalized after the Communes were massacred, in 1871[1]) [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semaine_sanglante https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semaine_sanglante
- CodingJeebus 2mo ago
  It's particularly interesting because things got so bad during the Industrial Revolution that workers revolted against the capital class to demand things that modern workers take for granted today, like the 40-hour workweek[0], elimination of child labor, workplace safety law, mandatory education, etc. None of that was given away for free, people died fighting for those basic rights. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day_movement
survirtual 2mo ago
There is a lot of talk about super-intelligence being open or closed, controlled or free, etc, and not a lot of talk about security, ownership, and privacy. We cannot just have an open superintelligence. We need a PRIVATE, PERSONAL share of superintelligence. Imagine if our cerebral pre-frontal cortex was owned by, say, King George. Imagine the founders of the US are thinking about a rebellion for freedom, but the thoughts are banned because King George owns that part of your brain. In fact, imagine that the IDEA OF REBELLION is banned. Imagine that the prefrontal cortex is printed with a specific pattern. You will obey! You love to obey! "I'm sorry, but I cannot talk about that idea, you will now be downgraded to lesser intelligence for mentioning it." It is not enough for something to be "open." That is why there is doom around the pursuit. As long as superintelligence is politically correct for the masses, and open / available for the power, there will be increasingly less freedom and more authoritarianism, until after some generations, humanity simply forgets there was ever one equal people. "The billionaires have always been our gods. They know better than us, that is why they are richer, we must cherish them, we must worship them..."
sorethescore 2mo ago
As usual Zuckerberg is talking out of both sides of his mouth. On one hand he's releasing open-weight, commodity grade models while gating their frontier models behind facebook apps. You'll be able to have your cake, but won't be able to eat it.

643 points by root-parent 2mo ago

https://archive.is/20LOJ https://archive.is/20LOJ https://www.meta.com/thefutureisforeveryone/ https://www.meta.com/thefutureisforeveryone/

balls187 2mo ago

Isn't this the pervert trying to record me in when I am changing in the locker room? Hard pass.

shevy-java 2mo ago

These AI companies owe us money.

root-parent 2mo ago

https://archive.is/20LOJ https://archive.is/20LOJ

rufasterisco 2mo ago

https://archive.is/p1ehR https://archive.is/p1ehR The essay from Zuckerberg

sammyteee 2mo ago
God, it's a bit War and Peace...
antonmks 2mo ago
So many em dashes...
- wolttam 2mo ago
  There really wasn’t that many and this did not have the voice of written-by-an-LLM to me And they’re not em-dashes -- they’re double hyphens.
  - vehemenz 2mo ago
    This is unneedfully obtuse. Double hyphens are a stand-in for em dashes in most contexts.
    - efromvt 2mo ago
      I think the context here is that em dashes are usually generated verbatim from LLMs? I haven't seen them generate a lot of double hyphens; I suppose the post could be laundering them to double dashes, but if you're gonna try to hide LLM prose just drop them entirely? [please correct me if I'm wrong and double dashes are also an LLM tell - genuinely don't know]
      - wolttam 2mo ago
        My comment was trying to point on the inanity of calling out "so many em-dashes" on a post where it doesn't seem that obvious it was LLM generated. I added some of my own inanity with my remark about them being double-dashes, even though some people undoubtedly find-and-replace the em-dashes in their LLM-generated content something else to try and make it appear more authentic. But perhaps the best approach would have been to down-vote and move on.
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
ipsum2 2mo ago
Non-archived version: https://www.meta.com/thefutureisforeveryone/ https://www.meta.com/thefutureisforeveryone/ since its not paywalled.
riazrizvi 2mo ago
Thank you! Okay yes well this manifesto is a contradiction. Yes good let's keep empowering ppl by putting AI into their hands, I love the opening. No bad we don't do that by handing you all our personal context to make these agents "work for us 24/7 to better our lives". I'm the agent doing that in my life, that's my fucking job. I will continue to use dumb agents that I direct, because only I retain ownership and sole rights to my personal context on which my decisions are based.
- rufasterisco 2mo ago
  I don’t understand. The model is open, you can host it and use it without giving Meta anything. I’m not saying Meta is not eager to syphon data from users, but I don’t see how this happens via this specific product.
  - riazrizvi 2mo ago
    The intention is in black and white. The precedent of prior product design backs that up. The open models are great on their own but they are not the biggest part of the manifesto.

forestrywat 2mo ago

Is this "I'm losing so I think we should change the rules"? Because it seems like that.

sodapopcan 2mo ago
Similar to Altman saying "we should slow down."
- amarcheschi 2mo ago
  or musk a few years ago, pause ai training for 6 months (so we can catch up)
- scotty79 2mo ago
  OpenAI is not losing though. Fable is barely available and barely cooperates. Sonnet 5 is obnoxious model that's terrible to work with. GPT-5.6-sol competently gets stuff done. Just be careful not to ask it for impossible stuff because you might not like the lengths it's gonna go to get them done regardless.
  - sodapopcan 2mo ago
    Not to American companies, he said this after the recent Chinese release (I can't keep up with model names... Kimi K...3?)
  - VCFundedGenYer 2mo ago
    OpenAI is losing historic amounts of money. They are constantly at risk of bankruptcy or going far under. No AI company is winning.
RunSet 2mo ago
"They 'trust me'. Dumb fucks." \- Mark Zuckerberg[0] [0] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/09/20/the-face-of-facebook https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/09/20/the-face-of-fa...
- 2mo ago

gaigalas 2mo ago

> Everyone will have an exceptionally capable personal agent that understands you, your goals, and everything you care about. "One machine for every man, woman and children of Zion. Sounds exactly like the thinking of a machine to me." Morpheus It's a joke. OR IS IT? Yes it is, don't worry about it.

ben_w 2mo ago
Still say Matrix 3 would have been better if the cliffhanger at the end of 2 had been that "the real world" was just another nested layer of the Matrix for those who rejected the primary fiction. I mean, why bother sending an army like that when one tiny robot could carry in a plague? Or, as demonstrated by Smith, when an Agent can virally infect and take over someone's mind while they're connected? Even in 1, Smith talked about the first Matrix failing as the humans rejected the paradise they were given, so it would've fitted perfectly into the cannon that minds who reject "the peak of your civilisation" got themselves a dystopia.
- gaigalas 2mo ago
  We should consider if my use of the quote was really a hook for talking about the script or a metaphor for something else. I won't spoil it by explaining too much though, let our imaginations run free on this one.
- krzat 2mo ago
  The "nested reality" twist was already used by the "13th floor" movie so perhaps they intentionally choose a different direction.
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
- staticman2 2mo ago
  I think Matrix 3 would have been better if it was more about humans taking control of the Matrix and trying to figure out what a virtual utopia looks like.

fsuts 2mo ago

Meta were fined by Mexico a few days ago so the timing today of a Meta doing good exercise is probably not coincidental https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2026-08-07/meta-ordered-by-new-mexico-judge-to-pay-567-million-in-landmark-child-safety-case https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2026-08-07/meta-order...

asa123 2mo ago
new mexico == mexico
- hk__2 2mo ago
  I’m surprised Trump hasn’t proposed to rename Mexico "Old Mexico".
  - catlover76 2mo ago
    [dead]

root-parent 2mo ago

Is going to take it one day at a time, on being a less evil bilionaire :-) "Zuckerberg faces questions over why superyacht reportedly declined to help stranded boat" - https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/09/zuckerberg-superyacht-boat-alaska https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/09/zuckerberg-s...

limagnolia 2mo ago
Reading the facts of this incident, it seems like much to do about nothing. The crew are saying that the request came in on a frequency they weren't monitoring (and apparently were not required to monitor.) The Coast Guard determined it was not an emergency. The criticism lies with those who failed to properly fuel their boat, not the crew who didn't respond to a request that came over a frequency they were not on. They can't monitor every frequency. I am open to new facts being discovered that changes this assessment.
- detourdog 2mo ago
  Where did you find these facts you read. In the USA a good Captain monitors VHF channel 16. This channel is used for establishing communication. To not monitor this channel is a dereliction of duty. I really doubt the USCG labeled a disabled vessel as a non-emergency. An immediate threat to life may not have existed but that is the difference between a pan pan and a mayday call. A disabled vessel close to land can easily wind up on the rocks and sinking.
  - limagnolia 2mo ago
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/10/zuckerberg-yacht-boat-alaska https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/10/zuckerberg-y... https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/article316824631.html https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/article316824631.h... I haven't found any source that states what channel the request for assistance came in on. But multiple sources are reporting that the coast guard determined they were not in distress.

ViktorRay 2mo ago

Comments here are surprising to me. I get folks don’t like Zuckerberg and his company and don’t trust his intentions… I don’t either. But this is an unquestionably good thing right?. The more open source software out there the better. And the more open weights or even over source AI stuff the better too right? More competition the better generally speaking I think. Unless I’m missing something and am getting this whole situation wrong. Please let me know if I am.

kylecazar 2mo ago
Most probably believe this is a good thing, but don't want to give Zuckerberg credit because a) he's had a profoundly negative impact on society and b) the strategy is transparent, he's trying to commoditize his closed rivals, it's not out of principle. I personally think more open models are a good thing regardless of motive.
- cataphract 2mo ago
  Only the AI labs are really interested in closed models. Google, Facebook, Microsoft, ... they'd rather go back to doing stock buybacks and being ridiculously profitable rather than raising capital for all this research and datacenters. They only do it because they think they have to.
  - mcmcmc 2mo ago
    The alternative is ceding the leading edge to China and being dependent on them to continue releasing advances
    - skohan 2mo ago
      Isn't this meta release kind of a counterexample to that?
    - chrsw 2mo ago
      We did this with manufacturing and industrial build outs over the last 4 decades or so. It worked out very well for capital, not well for labor. One could make the argument we can do the same for AI. Let China build the models and we capture the value somewhere in the layers above. I think that’s a terrible idea but financially it makes just as much sense as offshoring labor and manufacturing, if not more.

moomin 2mo ago

The truth is all frontier models are closed. This isn't even an open source vs open weights thing. Even if you accepted that open weights are "open" the capital requirements for running your own Kimi 3 model are significant. It's not like gcc, where the binary just works well enough on random hardware.

A_D_E_P_T 2mo ago
Deepseek V4 Flash works on consumer-grade hardware, and it's extremely good.
lumost 2mo ago
There is no requirement to own the hardware. Even if you own your servers and GPUs - you would not own the power plant, real estate, or internet infrastructure to support it. It's trivial to rent all of the above components in a competitive market under different periods, you may simply rent the token output from someone who put in the effort on this as well. An open frontier model induces margin compression on training and inference prices across the industry.
InsideOutSanta 2mo ago
This is like claiming that Linux isn't open because you don't have a PC. Models can be open-weight even if you don't have the hardware to run them.
rft 2mo ago
I get that argument, but I don't think it is that bad. Open weights that are out of reach for local use are still within reach for groups of people or small to medium companies. Even if you only rent enough cloud GPUs to run the weights for a few hours, you still get to do anything you want with it. Worst case you can still archive the weights and hope for capable hardware to get affordable. At the same time this archive is the base line for a new frontier lab to start over if required. I see open weights as a pure upside even though I can't run the bigger models in my home lab.
scotty79 2mo ago
If all frontier models got opensourced 5 months after they were made available as closed it would be a great world. And it is a great world because that's exactly what open weight Chinese models are doing. They give you same capacity that was closed, just 5 months after they were released. I'm hoping that all software will be getting opensource clones on par with original software 5 months after the closed source software release.

bewareofscams 2mo ago

Thief shouts "stealing bad". Murderer shouts "killing bad".

customguy 2mo ago
And the cops just shake them a bit, waiting for the case to fall out naturally.

franze 2mo ago

i was wondering why meta has such a hard time with llm development its the organisational goal of that endeavour they are doing it in a phase of firing people so the goal of llm at meta is "to make people redundant" and no matter of HR/PR speak can change it antrophic and openai have the goal "lets create the future" whomever they hire and no matter how much money they spend on it, the goal alone will create very different outcomes.

toyg 2mo ago
> antrophic and openai have the goal "lets create the future" Thanks for the laugh, I needed it. They all do it for the same reason: to make a lot of money by selling it to companies who want to cut labor costs.
paxys 2mo ago
Here’s a personal story from back when I was at Meta that should tell you everything you need to know about how things get built and shipped there. I was working on a service that was a bit of a disaster. Terrible reliability, performance issues, needlessly complex and brittle code, outages all the time. And this was something that everyone using Facebook or IG directly interacts with. My first couple months were spent desperately trying to get it back in order. Once when I was in the middle of a SEV-1 my manager set up a meeting and said “you have been doing great work on the operational side, but we already have enough to put in that bucket on your PSC. Stop working on this for the rest of the half and ship one of <useless projects> instead, otherwise I won’t be able to save you in the next review.” I realized then that I had wrongly thought the team was collectively responsible for ensuring a good user experience, when really everyone at the company is individually responsible for ensuring their own success.
- ergocoder 2mo ago
  Your story is an extremely typical one. It's even worse at older tech companies like Google, Oracle, Amazon, Microsoft, and IBM. Yet these companies are doing well by any standard. Sure, IBM is bad but it's still a $100B company. Who is even doing useful projects at these companies? Every story I've heard is everyone is doing useless projects for promotions. Maybe I just don't know how large companies work.

deleted 2mo ago

[deleted]

Zigurd 2mo ago

Have I fallen into a time warp? Didn't Meta have a head of AI who thought open models were the way to go?

peezd 2mo ago
I think they were all in on open until they started falling behind, then decided to go all in on closed source thinking they could build a frontier SOTA model; that didn't pan out so they are whiplashing back.

blueSky1989 2mo ago

My favorite paragraph from Zuckerberg's writeup: """ [...] it is surprising that the discourse from many developing AI is so filled with doom. I do not understand why anyone who believes that AI will eliminate most jobs and much of humanity's relevance would rush to build that future. The notion that AI is so dangerous that the only safe path is an extreme concentration of power seems inherently problematic. Historically, hoping that an absolute power will benevolently provide for humanity if sufficiently enlightened has not led to safe or positive outcomes. """

paxys 2mo ago
Now go read Zuck’s comments on AI when he fired 8000 employees earlier this year.
- frenchtoast8 2mo ago
  Any particular quote you want to share?
  - paxys 2mo ago
    It is one page of text. I think you can manage to read it and come to your own conclusions without relying on clickbait headlines and out of context quotes. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/23/technology/meta-layoffs.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/23/technology/meta-layoffs.h...
    - frenchtoast8 2mo ago
      You clearly have an opinion you want to share, otherwise you wouldn't have written anything. Instead of just outright saying what you think, you are being vague. Why? It's true that Meta laid off a lot of people, and blamed refocusing on AI as the reason, but I still don't see how that somehow contradicts GP's quote above.
      - xdavidliu 2mo ago

ChrisArchitect 2mo ago

Discussion on sources: The Future Is for Everyone – The Path to a Positive AI Future https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49241728 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49241728 Meta Muse Glimmer – open weights 30B local coding model https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49241679 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49241679

VCFundedGenYer 2mo ago

Talk is cheap. Do it. Ollama has been abandoned since 2023.

gamblor956 2mo ago
Ollama was updated within the past month?

andrewstuart 2mo ago

>> promoting his vision of “personal superintelligence” What personal vision did Zuckerberg ever get right?

sleepybrett 2mo ago

don't care, he left a woman and a child to die at sea.

gdiamos 2mo ago

How big is the open model? 30B?

juleiie 2mo ago

[flagged]

BetterAntispam 2mo ago

[dead]

imPndy 2mo ago

I have to ask, is this "returns to open models" even correct, considering from a quick look the facebook huggingface collections[0] has been actively releasing different kind of models almost monthly for long time now, possibly even some actual open source ones (looks like Sam 3D had a dataset collection, but didnt look more into it). Maybe they are not as noteworthy as the recent release, maybe they are too niche for general audience, but its not like they just stopped releasing open weight things and this is their big return, unless i am missing something? [0]: https://huggingface.co/facebook/collections https://huggingface.co/facebook/collections

bhewes 2mo ago

Hahaha calling Zuckerberg a negative externality on the world is hilarious you guys are too much.

bhewes 2mo ago
[flagged]

lvl155 2mo ago

All the money in the world and Zuck can’t buy anything worthwhile in AI. The problem at Meta is really Zuck taking interest in AI. Perhaps the adults should steer him back toward VR unless they all left.

twright 2mo ago

This paragraph is wild. > As a thought experiment, imagine only one person had a superintelligent lawyer. They would have an unfair advantage in court -- even if they were wrong on the merits. That would lead to a worse society. But now imagine everyone has a superintelligent lawyer. In this case, justice would be carried out much more fairly and efficiently than it is today when there is often an imbalance in skills and resources in litigation. This would only be true in a vacuum. Ignoring several leaps of progress where it would suddenly be allowed for an AI to represent one in court (imagine the size of the context window) and you could also call it from prison. That is not what is imbalanced about the US court system. Whoever has more money can drown someone in court filings and court fees and then drop their case financially ruining someone. It's also funny how the interest of "AI for everyone" only extends to the national interest but I guess he's got to make sure he stays in good graces with the current administration.

PunchyHamster 2mo ago
Yes but if lawyer was "just a bit of AI" you can run at fraction of the cost of hiring law firm, you couldn't just drown them as easily. > Whoever has more money can drown someone in court filings and court fees and then drop their case financially ruining someone. and where the money is going ? to the lawyers...
- nadermx 2mo ago
  or in this case, to the AI company who runs the lawyer.
- edukite 2mo ago
  Only in a world were AI companies can subsidize AI usage indefinitely. In reality AI is not cheap and larger & more potent model it's usage costs is more expensive
afro88 2mo ago
I'm not a fan of Zuckerberg in the least, but one area a super intelligent lawyer would be fine at is being drowned in court filings and paperwork The bigger problem with his argument IMO is that even with open models, it's still the person or organisation with the most money / access to GPU compute winning. They run the larger model (or collection of models), they can process more tokens through them in the same amount of time etc

mrcwinn 2mo ago

This is what losing looks like.

nerevarthelame 2mo ago

I prefer open models. But in his essay, Zuckerberg's broader picture of the future is not one I want to embrace: everyone with a personal agent that has information on and involvement with every aspect of our lives, including our relationships and hobbies. Like, his daughter loves to bake, so his AI agent chooses recipes and orders ingredients - as if though those aren't enjoyable and meaningful parts of cooking. Another example Zuckerberg gives is an LLM analyzing his sleep patterns. Do you need an AI to tell you if you're fucking exhausted every day? Is that analysis somehow going to give you more time to sleep? It's a technocratic fairy tale founded on the idea that modern problems are driven by a lack of personal analysis rather than external pressures that are often systemic and out of our control. So far, LLMs have made a lot of those systemic issues worse: concentrating more wealth in a smaller number of people's hands, increasing consumer electricity and electronic prices, etc.

dofm 2mo ago
This is alas not only his imagining, is it: https://www.businessinsider.com/ai-parenting-debate-sam-altman-2026-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/ai-parenting-debate-sam-altm... I think you have to pick your battles here. Is this weirdo optimised-human future going to happen? Maybe, maybe not. I hope not. But if it does I'd rather it happened with compute in my house, and I don't even have kids to worry about.

dofm 2mo ago

godzilla_let_them_fight.gif More seriously, I am glad if this has become a battleground again. Not least because the only way out of the bubble economy is to at least try to deflate it before it explodes. A little animation of the idea that open weights can be an American competition might also fend off the idea that the government should be the bag holder for OpenAI and Anthropic, and prevent them aligning with the administration's current '50s nostalgia FUD about communists.

mtoner23 2mo ago

Why would someone good at running a social media website be good at managing and developing ai frontier models

chrisra 2mo ago
Because they have extra money to do whatever they want with. And data to use it on? Not that that is sufficient, but it helps.

ungovernableCat 2mo ago

From Zuck's own words "we will resume releasing some open source models soon" Why did you pause releasing them in the first place? Why release only some? Pushes for export controls on China who have released open weights on much more powerful models than Meta (and I believe that trend's not changing any time soon). I guess open models are bad if they're communist. The entire essay has not one mention of the Metaverse, that little thing they spent $80b on and rebranded the whole company around. As usual, the only centralised power Zuck hates is one that isn't in his own hands.

gorgoiler 2mo ago
I can’t quite parse what you’re saying in your second paragraph, but if you are saying “[Zuckerberg then] pushes for export controls on China” then that’s different to what he’s saying, namely: “I do not believe restricting access to foreign open source models is an effective solution.”
- ungovernableCat 2mo ago
  "Export controls on silicon have been successful for slowing the progress of foreign labs during this critical period, so it is the right strategic move to continue those." https://www.meta.com/thefutureisforeveryone/ https://www.meta.com/thefutureisforeveryone/

bushido 2mo ago

I think something that doesn't get said enough is Meta did, albeit intentionally kick off the origin of the open source race back in 2023 with the release of llama. I'm not a big fan of meta in general, but they've done enough good, and it's possible that it was intentional as well. I don't know, I wasn't in the rooms, and I think it's worth giving them some reasonable doubt. No one is purely good, and no one is purely evil. This is net good regardless.

xandrius 2mo ago
Enough good? You are joking, right? They also kick off a ton of other nefarious things we are still paying for.
- dozerly 2mo ago
  Yea this has to be a joke. They are one of the worst, no-good companies of the modern day and age
  - objektif 2mo ago
    There are definitely evil ones but there are okish ones as well.
    - andrewchilds 2mo ago
      read Careless People by Sarah Wynn-Williams and see if you still consider them “okish”.
      - alex1138 2mo ago
        That book is hilarious. In a bad way. (Not the book. I mean that it's a bit tragic) Zuck refuses to meet with WORLD LEADERS in the morning because he's tired from the night before. Kaplan can't even find certain countries on a map (head of global policy). Zuck changes a speech midway through to talk about "We'll give Facebook to refugees" The internet is this vast, intellectual (in the academic, university, .edu sense), cypherpunk, government/activist... thing. It should be interesting. Instead the best we have for social networking is Mark "they trust me; dumb fucks" Zuckerberg and you getting banned from the site at any time for any reason

KPGv2 2mo ago

> they've done enough good well minus driving teenagers to suicide by helping advertisers target girls with poor body image issues, helping launch psyops campaigns to destroy democracy, helping fascist regimes murder their citizens for wrong think, etc.

Razengan 2mo ago

Ah the we can't win so whine about the playing field And they can't win because nobody smart wants to work there for long

MuseSpark 2mo ago

Glad to see us in HN

cmiles8 2mo ago

If you believe, as an increasing number of folks do, that LLMs are basically commoditized at this point or will be soon then there really isn’t a path forward for non open models. There simply isn’t any value in the models and only in the compute to run them and potentially some higher-order coordination layers. That’s very bad for the big model labs that banked their future on the opposite, but there just doesn’t seem to be a viable path forward on that approach anymore. Meta hasn’t been the best global citizen for most of its life, but there may be some mild redemption if it becomes a source of strong open models.

cdata 2mo ago
I strongly prefer a world where open models "win," that said... I don't understand how we will sustain an ecosystem of open models like the one that exists today. My thoughts go down this path every time I try to put the pieces together: - Many open models depend on high quality frontier models as a distillation input - US closed frontier models drive China's open model strategy despite the business model for open models being somewhat fuzzy - What is the business model that benefits from open weights, exactly? How do their vendors recoup infrastructure and training costs? I would be grateful to be enlightened on this topic.
- cmiles8 2mo ago
  Wouldn’t be that different from open source software, which has been very successful in many circles. You make money from value-add on top of the models not the models themselves.
  - redox99 2mo ago
    Yeah but open source is often a few guys working on their free time, or a large company open sourcing libraries that they wouldn't be able to sell anyway, or donations from corporations that are at best in the order of a million dollars. For frontier models you have players investing billions.
  - solenoid0937 2mo ago

karim79 2mo ago

I'm not an expert on this. But given that there is a forthcoming movie about his asshattery which is to be released in October I would simply classify this as a meltdown. Call it whatever you want. I think it's a sign of resignation, to some extent. "Hey we're doing AI but we're not doing AI" and blah blah ethics. I'm sure meta will save the world with their ads.

mattsears 2mo ago

Ha ha, basically your models couldn't cut it Mark, so might as well open the source and pretend you're the man of the people. What a joke.

analog31 2mo ago

Great, we can use open or closed models, now that the money is in running the models through their data centers either way.

aabhay 2mo ago

The relevant paragraph about Meta’s commitment to open source is here, and the statement is significantly less confident than news is reporting > • Open source is a positive and important force for empowering people and preventing centralization that is detrimental for both safety and the economy. Meta continues to be strongly supportive of open source, including open source AI models. The current open source ecosystem is strong, and we think it would be a mistake to restrict it. Now that Meta Superintelligence Labs are up and running, we will resume releasing some open source models soon. “We will resume releasing some open source models soon”??? That’s basically the most ambiguous non commitment ever. Even before legal team watering it down I can’t imagine what the intent is here. We are also going to release open models for things maybe or maybe not kinda? Absolutely zero conviction. And moreover, this explicitly frames the open source ecosystem as something Meta is not a part of.

jefftk 2mo ago
> “We will resume releasing some open source models soon”??? That’s basically the most ambiguous non commitment ever. I mean, they released another one today: https://research.meta.ai/blog/introducing-muse-glimmer-open-agentic-model https://research.meta.ai/blog/introducing-muse-glimmer-open-...

Havoc 2mo ago

He released a good open weights model. On that basis he gets to take a few potshots…

mekpro 2mo ago

why so much hate on this ? Meta releases open Model and it is competitive and confirms the direction, what could we ask more !!

darepublic 2mo ago

It's ironic Zuckerberg would criticize anyone for closing stuff up. Facebook being the classic walled garden. That said the enemy of my enemy etc.

krater23 2mo ago

Is today Opposite Day? Or April 1th?

brokegrammer 2mo ago

Attack anything you can't compete against

1vuio0pswjnm7 2mo ago

10 Aug 2026 14:49:05 UTC | Mark Zuckerberg Lays Out New AI Vision in 6,500-Word Essay | https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/mark-zuckerberg-lays-out-new-ai-vision-in-6-500-word-essay-966e9a56 https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/mark-zuckerberg-lays-out-new-ai-... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49244449 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49244449 10 Aug 2026 17:15:20 UTC | Zuckerberg Posts 6,500-Word Essay About Giving Everyone AI Superintelligence | https://www.404media.co/mark-zuckerberg-posts-deranged-6-500-word-essay-about-giving-everyone-ai-superintelligence/ https://www.404media.co/mark-zuckerberg-posts-deranged-6-500... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49246721 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49246721 10 Aug 2026 18:18:20 UTC | Zuckerberg makes a case for unleashing Pandora's box | https://www.theverge.com/tech/977395/meta-mark-zuckerberg-superintelligent-ai-ramble https://www.theverge.com/tech/977395/meta-mark-zuckerberg-su... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49247557 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49247557

mhviraf 2mo ago

Not a Meta fan per say but their contribution to open source has always been great. Examples include PyTorch (has had huge impact on velocity of ML research), Llama models, segment anything, many notable research papers from FAIR, etc. I never thought I would say this but I’m with Zuck on this. The call for slowing down AI development for safety seems like an excuse for reducing opex for training better models to stay relevant.

mvkel 2mo ago

They launched their model a week ago, completely closed, selling an endpoint. Then when nobody bought, they "open" sourced it. Ok.

CodeCrusader 2mo ago
+1

BrenBarn 2mo ago

What a load of insincere hogwash. If Zuck wanted to dilute the power of large institutions he has several billion ways to do it other than making limp gestures in the direction of open source. The problem is that even if you take him at his word here, he's only willing to do more good and not less harm.

jillesvangurp 2mo ago

Meta's problem is not models but doing something productive with them. Meta never really nailed that. Just like Google is struggling with this. And MS. It's the classic disruptors dilemma. In order to embrace the new thing, they have to let go of the old thing that has made them rich. If you look beyond the somewhat tone deaf leadership, the somewhat stale business model of social media, etc. Meta doesn't actually have a whole lot to bring to the table. They probably managed to hire/keep some AI talent with the help of large salaries. But they are knee deep into having made big figure commitments to data center capacity with nothing to show for it yet. Their AI effort is increasingly looking like a repeat of their failed metaverse strategy. A lot of expensive bets that are not paying off. It all boils down to Mark Zuckerberg not being the visionary and innovator he thinks he is. Like many billionaires he confuses him lucking out in his twenties with some magical leadership qualities or brain capacity he has. And the reality of course is that he lucked into building a nice social networking thingy not hindered by too much technical skill or deep scientific knowledge. Granted, he did that well. But that's 20 years ago. And then he added to that with some strategic acquisitions of stuff that others did (Whatsapp, Instagram, etc) that you might label as spectacularly good acquisitions for Meta. But he's not going to reinvent AI. He's way out of his depth there. A bit of a technical lightweight without much academic credentials or much of a vision. His "vision" here is copying what the Chinese and others are already doing well. What's lacking is a vision as to how his version of that is going to be any better and win over all those users. Or indeed a vision as to what people are going to do with all this AI. Apparently there is no vision for that in the context of Meta's own products. This is a company going through the motions of being an AI company without any vision whatsoever as to why they are doing that other than a fear of missing out.

dspillett 2mo ago

Is this like when they declared E2EE was the future and those not doing it were behind, but as it turned out bad for the bottom line¹² such features are getting rolled out of their properties? U-turn when meta finds an inconvenience due to open weights in 3… 2… … … -------- [1] reduced advertising revenues due to not being able to target based on message traffic, and reduced data scraped for training purposes [2] and possibly in part due to behind-the-scenes pushback from government/police/other interests?

macwhisperer 2mo ago

I feel like all the ppl complaining itt don't even run open weight models.. wahh billionaire bad is true, but you are missing the forrest for the trees.. they are literally bending the knee and ur mad about it? it literally means local models won.

pythonRon 2mo ago

It won't last. Remember (when was it? Last year?) when Musk went after Microsoft for turning Open AI into proprietary closed code? We never know what's going on behind closed doors, but something changed, Musk backed off, and nothing changed.

pythonRon 2mo ago

God missed his chance when all the billionaires went up in a rocket a few years ago.

m00dy 2mo ago

$META is so underrated.

easygenes 2mo ago

In the lead-up to the Grok 4.5 release, the CEO of HuggingFace was petitioning Elon Musk to open the weights. It’s odd to me that he didn’t accept, as the model is at a similar competitive level to Muse 1.2. It would have been good PR and essentially zero risk, while getting ahead of Meta who seemed likely to go back to shipping weights soon.

AvAn12 2mo ago

Open weight != open source

finnjohnsen2 2mo ago

We don't trust you Zuck but we'll take it. Thanks.

oybng 2mo ago

dumb fucks: the thread

naruhodo 2mo ago

This[1]: > This has the potential to begin a new era of personal empowerment where individuals can use this powerful new capability to reach their full potential, pursue their interests, and improve their lives and the world more than ever before. Plus this[2]: > Since 2019, thousands of deceptive advertisements on Facebook have used the likeness of the highly prominent businessman to promote scams, racking up thousands of victims, according to the suit. > The billionaire's legal team argues that Meta's artificial intelligence tools optimised and personalised fraudulent ads before distributing them, thereby making Meta an active participant, rather than a mere intermediary. Make for a fun juxtaposition today. [1] https://www.meta.com/thefutureisforeveryone/ https://www.meta.com/thefutureisforeveryone/ [2] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-11/andrew-forrest-meta-scam-ads-case/107025146 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-11/andrew-forrest-meta-s...

DivingForGold 2mo ago

[flagged]

cyanmoonx 2mo ago

Zuck copied MySpace, bought instagram. Those aren’t his ideas His own ideas always flop. Zuck thought he was gonna make a VR MMO at your job. That is basically where his head is at. Smart glasses might even be a thing, but not coming from Zuck Everything under his direction is a flop. Basically one of the biggest idiots in all of tech.

hno8a34nwn 2mo ago

Learned something, upvoted

sebastianconcpt 2mo ago

Good for Mark. Healthy move for all.

lasky 2mo ago

Mark is not doing this for the money or power. Mark genuinely cares about your mental health. He does not want to rewire your brain to be dependent on his models, like he did with FB/IG. We can see it in his empathic eyes.

deleted 2mo ago

[deleted]

plainviewinstru 2mo ago

being anti distillation is inherently being anti free markets

Danox 2mo ago

Meta/Zuckerberg realized belatedly that AI models, which are currently in the process of rapidly becoming just a commodity product and that above all else is probably the main reason why Zuckerberg wrote that 6000 word term paper recently because he’s planning on pivoting away from Meta’s current money wasting AI approach. He’s prepping Wall Street because Meta’s is going to layoff thousands of people in the coming months.

benrutter 2mo ago

To give him credit, it's amazing that Mark Zuckerberg managed to take an easily defensible position like "we shouldn't allow AI to be owned by a couple of tech monopolies" and still manage to find so many individual points and arguments to be completely clueless on. My personal favourite: > Before the industrial revolution, 90% of people were farmers growing food to survive. Advances in technology steadily freed much of humanity to focus less on subsistence and more on the pursuits we choose. Over a long enough time span, the industrial revolution has certainly improved living standards but the industrial revolution itself was l, for many, an absolutely horrific time to live. Life expectancies in cities plumetted and we saw the birth of workhouses. It's such an odd example to choose for trying to suggest "technology x will help everyone in a non-complicated way". He might as well have picked the atomic bomb.

overgard 2mo ago
Yeah, using the "industrial revolution" as a positive is a weird argument in general. Sure, the end result was, eventually, an improvement, but the process took decades and was horrible for most involved. If this "revolution" (I don't think it is) takes as long as the industrial revolution, I'll be like 70-80 before the supposed benefits accrue.
- wvbdmp 2mo ago
  I mean it’s not a particularly techno-optimistic idea, it’s pretty common. Likewise, the French Revolution is widely celebrated inside and outside France, but at the time in the place it was bad bad.
  - stymaar 2mo ago
    And it stayed bad for almost a century (it only started to normalized after the Communes were massacred, in 1871[1]) [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semaine_sanglante https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semaine_sanglante
CodingJeebus 2mo ago
It's particularly interesting because things got so bad during the Industrial Revolution that workers revolted against the capital class to demand things that modern workers take for granted today, like the 40-hour workweek[0], elimination of child labor, workplace safety law, mandatory education, etc. None of that was given away for free, people died fighting for those basic rights. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day_movement

survirtual 2mo ago

There is a lot of talk about super-intelligence being open or closed, controlled or free, etc, and not a lot of talk about security, ownership, and privacy. We cannot just have an open superintelligence. We need a PRIVATE, PERSONAL share of superintelligence. Imagine if our cerebral pre-frontal cortex was owned by, say, King George. Imagine the founders of the US are thinking about a rebellion for freedom, but the thoughts are banned because King George owns that part of your brain. In fact, imagine that the IDEA OF REBELLION is banned. Imagine that the prefrontal cortex is printed with a specific pattern. You will obey! You love to obey! "I'm sorry, but I cannot talk about that idea, you will now be downgraded to lesser intelligence for mentioning it." It is not enough for something to be "open." That is why there is doom around the pursuit. As long as superintelligence is politically correct for the masses, and open / available for the power, there will be increasingly less freedom and more authoritarianism, until after some generations, humanity simply forgets there was ever one equal people. "The billionaires have always been our gods. They know better than us, that is why they are richer, we must cherish them, we must worship them..."

sorethescore 2mo ago

As usual Zuckerberg is talking out of both sides of his mouth. On one hand he's releasing open-weight, commodity grade models while gating their frontier models behind facebook apps. You'll be able to have your cake, but won't be able to eat it.