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.
Open weight models are not open software. Its better than closed blackbox models sold by Sam and Mario, but Zuck supporting open weight models when he (and other big boys) hoards all the compute required to run any model, including open weight models only shows that he realized he cant beat Sam and Mario, so wants their leverage to go away.
This isn’t the first time Zuckerberg has espoused the benefit of openness and transparency and how that would create a better society. I get this is a bit different, but the language and sentiment are close enough. Facebook and Instagram are now so closed you cannot view a business page without an account. I think it sold fair to recognize open today does not mean open tomorrow. They want to acquire users and build a platform and that means doing something different than the competition.
'Closed because scraping' is a big problem of hypocrisy
Let's say in a pretend world where Facebook gives a shit about anything (so, they combat marketplace scams, they don't randomly ban users, they faithfully show you posts from friends, they don't extort businesses) they want to protect privacy. So they close the site off, because scraping means there's no privacy. If I scrape your profile and export it to any number of sites, then it's not private. Ergo: closed. Sign up to view things, so we know who you are
But of course in the actual world that's not what they do. They purely want to do this to get more people to sign up so they 'have more users'. You can tell, because of who MZ is. You can tell because of how aggressive their own AI scrapers are on other sites. I've even heard they made a tool for Myspace that would enable you to transfer your contacts over to Facebook - but not the other way around
I'll always opt for giving companies / people praise for doing the right thing regardless of how infrequently they do so. I hope Mark Zuckerberg keeps open sourcing models.
If you've seen Zuckerberg for long enough you'll see he doesn't hold any position for all that long. Remember they renamed the entire company for a product idea he basically abandoned. So if he does "the right thing" you can just wait, he'll give up on it pretty soon.
I think it's positive and at the very least it's a force countervailing the push to legislate or ban open models in the US
If they were able to make a leading closed model would they be doing it though? It seems like they read the room and saw that this is the only way they can have relevance within LLMs
Not if you are worried about the existential threat AI poses.
Having easily available AI makes it hardier to regulate, control and limit until we find a way to align AI. Harder to control is a good thing for most technologies, but not for all. A weak analogy is nuclear weapons. if Meta would release and open source some tech that would magically make extremely easy and cheap for everyone to build a nuke, it would not be a positive for society.
It's likely a good thing, and I don't like attacks ad ominem. But also there comes a point where the sum total of what you did becomes negative enough that you lose the benefit of the doubt. You're past redeemable, and anything you do becomes immediately suspicious.
He could give his entire fortune to UNICEF and retire as a monk, I would still probably think this is part of a scheme.
But yeah advocating for open source anything is a good thing, I guess. Ironic if you think about he's been fighting to keep FB's algorithms hidden.
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.
"""
[...] 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.
"""
Am I the only one getting the impression this dude was merely lucky back in the day, in fact at the right time, rather than having been super intelligent nor forward thinking… ?
I mean - given all his throw outs in media and his apparent burn of nearly 80bn for a failed 3D world?
All dictators and Fascists in the history believe they are benevolent and doing best for the society/World. Fascism seems to be the dominant ideology among SV billionaires today. They want more control, not because they need more money, but because they want to do “good” to everyone in the world. They genuinely believe they can dominate the world using AI. They are playing the World domination game. They act and talk like the commanders of the armies and rulers of the nations. They are after the absolute power so nothing less is enough for them.
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?
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.
> 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.
115 comments
[ 0.21 ms ] story [ 12.0 ms ] threadThe essay from Zuckerberg
"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.
https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2026-08-07/meta-order...
"Zuckerberg faces questions over why superyacht reportedly declined to help stranded boat" - https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/09/zuckerberg-s...
There are many reasons for critizing him over things he is responsible for.
Never been a fan of mob lynching.
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.
Let's say in a pretend world where Facebook gives a shit about anything (so, they combat marketplace scams, they don't randomly ban users, they faithfully show you posts from friends, they don't extort businesses) they want to protect privacy. So they close the site off, because scraping means there's no privacy. If I scrape your profile and export it to any number of sites, then it's not private. Ergo: closed. Sign up to view things, so we know who you are
But of course in the actual world that's not what they do. They purely want to do this to get more people to sign up so they 'have more users'. You can tell, because of who MZ is. You can tell because of how aggressive their own AI scrapers are on other sites. I've even heard they made a tool for Myspace that would enable you to transfer your contacts over to Facebook - but not the other way around
[1] 82 TB of books https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intell...
[2] Here's a simple 12-step manusl process to opt-out on Facebook https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1794863603964891567.html
If they were able to make a leading closed model would they be doing it though? It seems like they read the room and saw that this is the only way they can have relevance within LLMs
Let the results speak after all is said AND done.
The trade/net is:
1) bad company does good things..
2) further reinforces toxic Ends Justify The Means thinking.
He could give his entire fortune to UNICEF and retire as a monk, I would still probably think this is part of a scheme.
But yeah advocating for open source anything is a good thing, I guess. Ironic if you think about he's been fighting to keep FB's algorithms hidden.
Murderer shouts "killing bad".
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.
""" [...] 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. """
I mean - given all his throw outs in media and his apparent burn of nearly 80bn for a failed 3D world?
All dictators and Fascists in the history believe they are benevolent and doing best for the society/World. Fascism seems to be the dominant ideology among SV billionaires today. They want more control, not because they need more money, but because they want to do “good” to everyone in the world. They genuinely believe they can dominate the world using AI. They are playing the World domination game. They act and talk like the commanders of the armies and rulers of the nations. They are after the absolute power so nothing less is enough for them.
The Future Is for Everyone – The Path to a Positive AI Future
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49241728
Meta Muse Glimmer – open weights 30B local coding model
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49241679
Ollama has been abandoned since 2023.
What personal vision did Zuckerberg ever get right?
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
> 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.
https://archive.is/CzfHj