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.

""" [...] 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 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.

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

"Zuckerberg faces questions over why superyacht reportedly declined to help stranded boat" - https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/09/zuckerberg-s...

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.

> • 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.

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

The essay from Zuckerberg

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... | 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-su... | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49247557

> 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

"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...

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.

And they can't win because nobody smart wants to work there for long

What personal vision did Zuckerberg ever get right?

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

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.

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.

Hard pass.

I honestly feel sad for him.

Remember the wind surfing photo? This guy is so weird probably since birth. Called a lizard person routinely. There is no cure possibly. Unless the AI can invent it.

Having money and financial success is one thing but the money simply can't buy you a normal human brain.

If you are a reptile once, you are a reptile forever.

Murderer shouts "killing bad".

Ollama has been abandoned since 2023.