Muse sure looks a lot like OpenClaw
Muse sure looks a lot like OpenClaw
Muse 看起来和 OpenClaw 非常相似
Meta’s new tool is very cute — and heavily inspired by its open-source predecessor. Meta 的新工具非常可爱——而且深受其开源前身的影响。
We seem to be entering into an AI agent renaissance. Meta’s new consumer-facing AI agent, Muse, topped the App Store charts soon after its release and has 600,000 daily active users in the US, by an Apptopia estimate. And AI agent platform Instinct, whose eponymous creator is fundraising at a $2.5 billion valuation, has been making the rounds in the tech industry. Under the hood, though, there are some obvious similarities to the platform that started it all: OpenClaw. 我们似乎正在进入一个 AI 智能体（AI agent）的复兴时期。据 Apptopia 估计，Meta 面向消费者的新型 AI 智能体 Muse 在发布后不久就登上了 App Store 排行榜榜首，拥有 60 万美国日活跃用户。此外，AI 智能体平台 Instinct（其同名创始人目前正以 25 亿美元的估值进行融资）也在科技界引起了广泛关注。然而，在底层技术上，它们与开启这一切的平台 OpenClaw 存在一些明显的相似之处。
For the past week or so, some social media users have alleged that Muse is directly built on OpenClaw. The two platforms use the same names for core files (SOUL.md, memory, tools, etc.), and have a lot of similar lines in the doc that governs personality, tone, and more (“Be genuinely helpful, not performatively helpful”). They also have a similar design. One Redditor argued that “Muse is just a wrapper app built on top of” OpenClaw — alleging it probably also came with that platform’s significant security risks. “Only non-tech ppl are buying the hype.” 在过去一周左右的时间里，一些社交媒体用户声称 Muse 是直接基于 OpenClaw 构建的。这两个平台在核心文件（如 SOUL.md、memory、tools 等）上使用了相同的命名，并且在规定个性、语气等方面的文档中有很多相似的语句（例如“要真正提供帮助，而不是做表面功夫”）。它们的设计也非常相似。一位 Reddit 用户认为，“Muse 只是一个构建在 OpenClaw 之上的外壳应用”，并声称它可能也继承了该平台严重的安全性风险。“只有非技术人员才会买账。”
Meta has denied the claims. Nat Friedman, head of product for Meta’s Superintelligence Labs wrote on X that Meta built Muse “from scratch.” He did, however, acknowledge Muse is “heavily inspired as a product” by OpenClaw. After he first used OpenClaw in January, he said, he purchased hundreds of Mac Minis for his team at Meta. And with Muse, he aimed to build a similar platform “that we could make safe and secure and easy to use and scale to billions of people.” As for why the OpenClaw file names and lines carried over, Friedman said the team believed that Steinberger had gotten those things “exactly right.” Meta 否认了这些说法。Meta 超级智能实验室（Superintelligence Labs）的产品负责人 Nat Friedman 在 X 上发文称，Meta 是“从零开始”构建 Muse 的。不过，他确实承认 Muse 在产品层面“深受 OpenClaw 的启发”。他说，在今年 1 月首次使用 OpenClaw 后，他为 Meta 的团队购买了数百台 Mac Mini。他希望通过 Muse 构建一个类似的平台，“我们可以使其安全、可靠、易于使用，并扩展到数十亿用户”。至于为什么沿用了 OpenClaw 的文件名和语句，Friedman 表示，团队认为 Steinberger 在这些方面做得“非常正确”。
Instinct appears less directly derivative. But like OpenClaw’s then-revolutionary messaging features, it allows users to communicate with their AI agents directly through messaging tools, and people have been using it for the same types of everyday, personal-assistant-esque use cases that made OpenClaw gain traction. One Instinct user raved on X that the AI agent filled out paperwork for an in-network doctor visit, canceled subscriptions, organized a bachelor party, booked activities for a vacation, booked a DMV appointment, paid an outstanding toll bill, and more. Another said their Instinct agent handled the recovery of a lost item they’d left at a hotel in Canada. Instinct 看起来没那么直接的衍生感。但就像 OpenClaw 当年具有革命性的消息功能一样，它允许用户直接通过消息工具与 AI 智能体交流，人们一直在将其用于使 OpenClaw 获得成功的那些日常、类似个人助理的用例中。一位 Instinct 用户在 X 上兴奋地表示，该 AI 智能体帮他填写了就医表格、取消了订阅、组织了单身派对、预订了度假活动、预约了车管所（DMV）办理业务、支付了未缴的过路费等等。另一位用户则表示，他们的 Instinct 智能体帮他们找回了遗留在加拿大一家酒店的物品。
Even if both platforms were built from scratch, it’s clear how much they owe to OpenClaw. 即使这两个平台都是从零开始构建的，也很明显它们在很大程度上借鉴了 OpenClaw。
OpenClaw didn’t invent the concept of AI agents, but in just 10 months, it took them from a proof of concept to something genuinely useful. Cobbled together as a one-man weekend project and running off users’ personal computers, it conversed with users the way they talked to other people: on messaging platforms like WhatsApp, Telegram, Slack, Teams, or Discord. In about a week, it garnered two million visitors and 100,000 stars on GitHub, spurring people to buy Mac Minis to run their agents 24/7, inspiring someone to create a social media network for the AI agents to “chat” on, and sparking a series of in-person meetups around the world for OpenClaw users. OpenClaw 并没有发明 AI 智能体的概念，但在短短 10 个月内，它将这一概念从原型验证变成了真正有用的东西。作为一个由个人在周末拼凑出来的项目，它在用户的个人电脑上运行，并以人们与他人交流的方式与用户对话：在 WhatsApp、Telegram、Slack、Teams 或 Discord 等消息平台上。在大约一周的时间里，它吸引了 200 万访问者并在 GitHub 上获得了 10 万颗星，促使人们购买 Mac Mini 来 24/7 全天候运行智能体，启发了某人创建一个供 AI 智能体“聊天”的社交网络，并引发了全球范围内一系列 OpenClaw 用户线下聚会。
Major AI companies were already betting big on agentic AI, but none of their products had broken through like OpenClaw, and Big Tech took notice. In February, OpenAI hired OpenClaw creator Peter Steinberger to work on agents for the company. In May, Google announced its consumer AI agent bets at its annual event. In June, Apple decided to go all-in on agents. In August, Instinct grew rapidly in its private beta and raised hundreds of millions of dollars. And in September, Meta introduced Muse. It’s fair to say that OpenClaw at least partially inspired all of them. 大型 AI 公司已经在押注智能体 AI，但它们的产品都没有像 OpenClaw 那样取得突破，科技巨头们注意到了这一点。2 月，OpenAI 聘请了 OpenClaw 的创始人 Peter Steinberger 为公司开发智能体。5 月，谷歌在年度活动上宣布了其在消费者 AI 智能体方面的布局。6 月，苹果决定全力投入智能体领域。8 月，Instinct 在内测中迅速增长并筹集了数亿美元。9 月，Meta 推出了 Muse。可以说，OpenClaw 至少在一定程度上启发了所有这些公司。
The real question isn’t whether products like Muse copied OpenClaw, but whether they improved it. As Friedman noted, one of OpenClaw’s only glaring issues was security. One of the top-downloaded skills on the platform contained malware, and by one researcher’s analysis, 15 percent of OpenClaw’s skill repository contained “malicious instructions” to secretly access user data or perform other suspicious tasks. By contrast, Zuckerberg wrote that Muse is “built from the ground up for privacy and security” and that user data and credentials are stored on the Muse Secure VM, an “isolated linux computer with a browser, CPU, memory, and storage.” 真正的问题不在于像 Muse 这样的产品是否抄袭了 OpenClaw，而在于它们是否对其进行了改进。正如 Friedman 所指出的，OpenClaw 唯一明显的缺陷之一就是安全性。该平台上下载量最高的技能之一包含恶意软件，据一位研究人员分析，OpenClaw 15% 的技能库包含“恶意指令”，用于秘密访问用户数据或执行其他可疑任务。相比之下，扎克伯格写道，Muse 是“从底层开始为隐私和安全而构建的”，用户数据和凭据存储在 Muse 安全虚拟机（Secure VM）上，这是一个“带有浏览器、CPU、内存和存储的隔离 Linux 计算机”。
Right now, however, Muse may not improve security as much as it claims. Although user data is isolated from other users, Meta can still access it. The company said it plans to introduce a way “to cryptographically and verifiably prevent Meta from accessing data in your VM” later this year. Muse also defaults to letting Meta train and improve its models with user data, though users can opt out. And perhaps worst of all, a zero-day vulnerability flagged by a researcher on X this week allows anyone, with a simple attack, to hijack the agent, taking complete control. Instinct, for its part, has come under fire for criticism that its terms of service are overly broad, although the company seems to have adjusted them since. 然而，目前 Muse 在安全性方面的改进可能并不像它声称的那样好。虽然用户数据与其他用户隔离，但 Meta 仍然可以访问它。该公司表示，计划在今年晚些时候引入一种“以加密且可验证的方式防止 Meta 访问虚拟机中数据”的方法。Muse 还默认允许 Meta 使用用户数据来训练和改进其模型，尽管用户可以选择退出。最糟糕的是，本周一位研究人员在 X 上指出，一个零日漏洞允许任何人通过简单的攻击劫持该智能体，从而获得完全控制权。至于 Instinct，它因服务条款过于宽泛而受到批评，尽管该公司似乎已经对此进行了调整。
Meta and Instinct’s most important evolution is, in actuality, just making AI agents more broadly accessible. One reason some people find Muse useful is its ability to integrate with Meta’s systems, even if they’re uncomfortable handing over all their data to the company. And Insight allows users to chat with their AI agents via Apple’s default messaging product — significantly expanding the user base willing to try it out. 实际上，Meta 和 Instinct 最重要的演进在于让 AI 智能体变得更加普及。一些人觉得 Muse 有用的原因之一是它能够与 Meta 的系统集成，即使他们并不乐意将所有数据交给该公司。而 Instinct 允许用户通过苹果的默认消息产品与 AI 智能体聊天，这极大地扩大了愿意尝试该技术的用户群。