Comment by satvikpendem
4 hours ago
I don't understand Muse, couldn't agents already do all this? I have ChatGPT for example and I can have it book tickets and other things for me, it even pulls up a cloud browser if it can't access APIs. It can check for details from my email and use those for the ticket. Now OpenAI has Dots too which is a 24/7 version of the same thing.
Sure, it's nothing super unique but the way that Meta has put all the pieces together including security works really well in practice. Muse seems to be the best of the AI personal assistants for regular people right now.
Does anyone believe the security works though? This is the company that brought us facebook, pervert glasses, and got sued by its E2EE content monitoring team (which apparently exists!) for emotional trauma because they had to read so much stuff from private WhatsApp messages.
I believe that Muse security is about as good as any other large cloud environment. In the long run maybe all of them will eventually be hacked but so far my other Meta accounts have been 100% secure. So I'll take my chances with Muse because it saves me time and allows me to get more done.
Those other issues, while perhaps examples of bad corporate behavior, aren't really security lapses per se.
1 reply →
Grok as well seems to have a hit a sweet spot.
UI/UX
Many times, UI/UX makes all the difference in user adoption & use.
But ChatGPT already has the same UI UX.
It isn’t though.
Muse is:
- a single thread
- has avatars that you can name
- has approval cards
Now dots is similar in concept but that only launched a few days ago and Muse launched a month ago.
It does not at all. ChatGPT is trying to be an everything app and it’s extremely convoluted by this point and hard for most people to make sense of, especially if you’re not in tech.
1 reply →
OpenAI does now with Dots but it’s still desktop only so they flubbed the ease of use that has made Muse and Grok such growth engines.
1 reply →
The article emphasises exactly what you said: technically it has no new features, it's just better UX than anything else, and more friendly to non-techies.
When it comes to being mainstream, an approachable UI sells
I don't understand C, couldn't assembly already do all this?
But chatgpt is still user friendly or claude I think also do these kinda of things
And dropbox is just rsync and some UI
Difference being they're already largely similar so the analogy would be between C# and Java.
This is the Dropbox comment of the AI assistant era. At least it's not quite as out of touch.
No, I'm asking why ChatGPT isn't sufficient because they literally do the same thing unlike Dropbox vs rsync. In other words ChatGPT has the same UI UX but people flock to Muse for some reason.
Facebook's install base is 3x that of cgpt
That’s pretty much the question the article tries to answer! TL;DR - good product design, personality mechanics, and ad-funded tokens is what makes it different.
Think of it as a Meta-hosted OpenClaw VM for each Facebook user.
Meta is reducing the friction for your parents to run OpenClaw without any assistance.
It’s the most consistent and user friendly agent with the ability to also be a harness for multiple custom agents. I literally had people running around the office amazed by muse last week. It has brought agents to the masses in a way a lay person can understand and use.