Pretty sure Zuck was talking about agents in general, not specifically Meta agents.

More importantly, he's really probably talking about 'superintelligence', rather than just building genuinely useful and monetizable models.

I’m sorry, what’s the question? Genuinely not sure.

I’ll rephrase, Zuckerberg would certainly enjoy agentic coding to be a wild success because it means less staff and more products he could fail to create.

Again, Zuck's success criteria don't necessarily align with that of others. In fact, I'd expect his success criteria are substantially different to most.

Making money? Seems to be the common success criteria for all.

It can both be a wild success and not what he expected.

These two not mutually exclusive?

“Wild success” and “going slower than expected”?

Wake me up when words have a meaning again.

> These two not mutually exclusive?

Correct, they are not.

Consider: Someone who "expects" their bank account to have $100M in it before they turn 30 and "only" gets it to $10M.

From the point of view of a normal sane person, they are experiencing "wild success", and yet at the same time they are definitely "going slower than [they] expected".

I think you’re a troll. We are talking about companies with money that makes countries blush. Let’s not pretend these things exist in a vacuum. Be serious.

In your case, if you have a goal and achieve 10% of it, you have failed the goal. Anything you have gained along the way is irrelevant.

If you don't like a personal scale example, just replace the M with a B. Or even a T, given the SpaceX IPO.

The only point here is "not as fast as expected" can still be a lot.

Are you sure you are not the troll? Your rhetoric is highly aggressive.