I don't get it. Is Meta handing out big $ for everyone to make Muse happen?
I don't get it. Is Meta handing out big $ for everyone to make Muse happen?
I cannot even deign to imagine someone trusting that company with an iota of their personal information, or that it would do anything constructive with it.
But I've seen enough people (presumably) astroturfing about it to know what their latest desperate "we matter" pitch is, and it just doesn't sound compelling at all. Certainly not to warrant the constant citations.
I understand that a lot of people use Meta products as an inertia from decades past. Indisputable. Yet several long-time avowed Meta critics, who I am quite certain do not use the product, are suddenly gushing about yet another agent and endlessly namedropping Muse. It is hugely suspicious.
?
On the other part of your comment: well, agree to disagree. Its probably just a good product and not everyone's hyper sensitive to privacy concerns.
DF and their ilk, are irrelevant so they need to talk it up to get their blogs, and podcasts relevant again in the 'AI' conversation.
You would have thought that Gruber would be talking about their own expert subject matter i.e. Apple more, but since 2016 he has been going off the Apple expert opinion into Politics, Trump, AI, etc and not mainly (or exclusively) Apple.
I don't know why anybody still follows DF anymore as in the age of video, social media and podcasts the DF blog has fallen off.
That being said, on Muse, I will reserve my judgement there.
Wait till Meta's earnings to see if Muse has got any numbers to share to see if it made a difference.