Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

  • Hacker News
  • They launched their model a week ago, completely closed, selling an endpoint. Then when nobody bought, they "open" sourced it. Ok.
  • The relevant paragraph about Meta’s commitment to open source is here, and the statement is significantly less confident than news is reporting

    > • 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.

  • If you believe, as an increasing number of folks do, that LLMs are basically commoditized at this point or will be soon then there really isn’t a path forward for non open models.

    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.

  • Is going to take it one day at a time, on being a less evil bilionaire :-)

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

  • Is this "I'm losing so I think we should change the rules"? Because it seems like that.
  • Comments here are surprising to me.

    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.

  • My favorite paragraph from Zuckerberg's writeup:

    """ [...] 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 think something that doesn't get said enough is Meta did, albeit intentionally kick off the origin of the open source race back in 2023 with the release of llama.

    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.

Explore Birbla archives

Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models · Birbla