Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
bdangubic | on: Muse Code and Muse Spark 1.2
I respsct the F out out you and all your work but I am completely baffled by this line of thinking, we are talking about Meta here…
simonw | parent
I just cannot comprehend this level of corporate villainy that boils down to:

Let's have two pricing levels. One will be 12.5x more expensive than the other. For the cheaper one, we will get their express permission to train models on their inputs. For the more expensive one, we will still treat their data EXACTLY the same, but we'll lie to them and say that we won't. I've checked in with legal and they raised their sherry glasses and toasted "Gentlemen, TO CRIME".

trollbridge | root | parent | next
Because data a user doesn’t want you to train is probably much better data?
sgt101 | root | parent | next
What I love is the idea that this is more likely to happen at Meta than at Anthropic, Google, Microsoft or OpenAI... or in the PRC!

There's contractual cover, there are lawyers all over the USA ready to make themselves very rich by creating a class action over it... you don't have to worry! Or, you do, but frankly, only MI6/CIA/Mossad can save you now.

ignoramous | root | parent | next
> I just cannot comprehend this level of corporate villainy that boils down to:

Easy to comprehend: Trust lost is hard to gain.

Though, it is extremely competitive of Meta to sell Muse Spark (Grok 4.5 / Qwen 3.8 Max level model) cheaper than DeepSeek v4 Flash / MiMo v2.5 / GPT 5.6 Luna, regardless.

bdangubic | root | parent | next
Again, this Meta we are talking about.......

We can make this fun, within 18 months from now, there will be some story / whistleblower like "a inadvertent defect was found that allowed your 'private' data to be used in our training endeavours, we sincerely apologize and have already addressed the issue" - if this does not happened in this timeframe I will donate $1k to a charity of your choice.

malshe | root | parent | next
Knowing Meta anything is possible. It’s not like they never shafted their paid customers. They have been overcharging advertisers by showing wrong metrics for years. I’m sure at some point they will come out with raised hands and admit to this “glitch” they found during an internal review.
arolihas | root | parent
No one has to say it and plan it out loud. But the data will be sitting there. The incentive to improve the model for enterprise use will only get stronger. It doesn't take much for one engineer or team to go rogue to hack a benchmark. There was a whole cheating controversy with llama 4.
j_maffe | root | parent
What does cheating benchmarks have to do with breaching financial user agreements? To use your argument: all it takes is one whistleblower to get the company sued for billions of dollars.