Meta just scheduled a generative AI conference called LlamaCon for April 29
Meta just announced its first-ever LlamaCon, a dev conference dedicated to generative AI. It's scheduled for April 29. Why the llama-based naming convention? The company titled the event after its family of generative AI models.
Meta promises to 'share the latest on our open source AI developments to help developers do what they do best: build amazing apps and products.' Beyond that vague description, we don't know much. There's no information regarding speakers or potential products being shown. We know that the company's working on Llama 4, with an early 2025 release window, so we'll most likely get a sizzle reel of some kind.
The company notes it'll have more to share about LlamaCon 'in the coming weeks.' Meta also says that '2025 is shaping up to be another banger' of a year. To that end, it has scheduled the next major Connect event for September 17. It promises plenty of reveals that should please 'virtual and mixed reality developers, content creators, metaverse mavens and AI glasses enthusiasts.' Meta Connect 2024 gave us the Quest 3S and the fancy-pants Orion prototype AR glasses.
According to TechCrunch, Meta has been scrambling to figure out how AI rival DeepSeek has managed to create tech that rivals its own at a fraction of the development cost. The report suggests that DeepSeek's upcoming models could outperform the aforementioned Llama 4. The company's also currently embroiled in a lawsuit that accuses it of training Llama models on copyrighted book materials without permission.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
34 minutes ago
- Forbes
Friction Is The Point: What AI Will Never Understand About Being Human
The machine doesn't care what it's making—only that it's making it fast. Frictionless systems ... More optimize output. But meaning, memory, and margin live in the mess it leaves behind. The great smoothing is here. But what if friction isn't failure? What if it's the only thing left that still feels real? This piece continues my article 'Meta's Plans For AI Ads: How Automation Dismantles Culture,' where I explored how automation threatens creative labor. Now, I'm going deeper: not just into what we're losing, but what we must protect—friction, consent, and the human capacity for meaning. These aren't just headlines. They're coordinates on a map of erasure. This isn't a pivot. It's a continuation. Meta, Amazon, and Google have a long, calculated history of dismantling everything that came before them under the guise of reducing 'friction.' Meta siphoned audience from publishers, then crushed their business model. Google devoured classifieds and local journalism. Amazon disintermediated independent retailers and built a commerce monopoly masked as convenience. Each of these shifts promised efficiency and delivered consolidation. Now they're moving upstream. With AI as their engine, they're coming for the creative layer. And if we think their pursuit of frictionlessness won't extend into brand, storytelling, and identity, we've already lost the plot. This isn't theoretical. It's already happened. Each was presented as innovation. Each led to mass devaluation. Now those same companies are moving up the funnel—with AI as the scalpel—to extract the last remaining margin in human-led work: branding, storytelling, identity, and desire. If we pretend this pursuit of frictionlessness will stop short of the emotional, we haven't been paying attention. The result won't just be sameness. It'll be compression—of differentiation, of perceived value, of margin. And when there's no friction left to make someone stop and feel? There's no reason left to pay more. For anything. That's not just a creative loss. That's a threat to profitability. We've taught machines to move faster than us, smoother than us, and now speak for us. But the one thing we haven't taught them? How to care about what happens next. I've sat in rooms where the best ideas weren't obvious. They were uncomfortable. They got laughed at, challenged, rewritten. And those are the ones we still remember. We've been told that friction is inefficiency. That anything slow, messy, or nonlinear is wasteful. But friction isn't failure. It's architecture. It gives shape to ideas. It makes meaning take root. Remove the friction and you remove the form. What's left is output. Not authorship. Not intentionality. Not risk. Not anything that ever made a thing matter. Even video—the medium that once required light, timing, pacing, and emotion—is now generated by Amazon in under five minutes. With AI handling production, creation, and deployment, the very texture of storytelling is being erased. And when the message is frictionless, so is the memory. The human brain doesn't grow easily. It rewires itself through difficulty, uncertainty, and contradiction. Neuroscientists call it neuroplasticity—the process by which new neural pathways are formed when we encounter resistance and complexity. Think about learning to ride a bike. You didn't master balance through reading. You did it by wobbling. Falling. Adjusting. That struggle is what encoded the learning. In creative work, the same principle holds. A campaign brief that sparks debate, a draft that undergoes fundamental revision—these are signs that the brain is actively restructuring perception and sharpening understanding. No amount of generative content can do this for you. The brain doesn't just tolerate friction; it grows because of it. Psychologists, such as Robert Bjork, have demonstrated that introducing intentional obstacles to learning—what he refers to as "desirable difficulty"—enhances retention and depth of understanding. Try recalling a concept before you're shown the answer. It's harder. Slower. But you remember it longer. That's friction in action. In advertising, we've spent years sanding down every edge in the name of clarity. But clarity without tension isn't clarity. It's blandness. Great creativity requires effort. It catches you off guard. That friction forces engagement. And that engagement makes it stick. If it's too smooth, it slides right off. This is a form of attentional bias—a cognitive reality that explains why we create and activate narrative in the first place. When words are grouped in a way that's fresh, specific, and strategically intentional, they interrupt expectation. That's friction. It forces a pause, processing, and reflection. And in a sea of sameness, that pause is power. Narratives slow the brain just enough to invite meaning in. They cause us to contemplate, validate, and value. And in a race-to-the-bottom world, friction becomes the difference between something you scroll past and something you feel compelled to pay for. Strip away that language-level friction and you get optimization without identity—cheap content, cheaper attention, and eventually, commodities no one desires enough to buy at a margin. That's not just a creative crisis. It's a business model collapse in slow motion. This is echoed by the work of Mihály Csíkszentmihályi, a Hungarian-American psychologist best known for introducing the concept of flow—the mental state of deep immersion in meaningful, challenging work. Csíkszentmihályi spent decades studying why some experiences make us feel alive, focused, and fulfilled. His research showed that the most rewarding activities are often preceded by resistance. Friction, in other words, is the entry fee to flow. It's not an obstacle to transcendence—it's the condition for it. The most powerful learning signal in your brain? When something violates your expectations. My friend calls this 'anticappointment,' a favorite neologism of his. Neuroscience refers to this prediction error as the moment your brain stops coasting and starts recalibrating. It's why punchlines land. Why plot twists thrill. Why disruptive creative works. When AI delivers content perfectly calibrated to what it knows we like, it flattens novelty, we get what we expect—and that's the problem. Nothing stretches. Nothing stirs. Friction is what creates those jolts of surprise. And surprise is what teaches. Without friction, the brain stays asleep. Berkeley anthropologist Alexei Yurchak, in his book Everything Was Forever, Until It Was No More, coined the term hypernormalization. He describes a society where systems are so optimized and hollow that people continue to believe in them, even though they know they no longer hold meaning. Yurchak studied late-Soviet life, where official narratives felt eternal and artificial at once. Citizens went through the motions—work, slogans, routine—long after anyone believed the story. The result wasn't a revolution. It was a slow, soul-deep detachment from reality. Today's version? You scroll through infinite, polished content with the faint sense that none of it was made for you. Brand messages, influencer posts, AI-generated ads—all optimized to fit your feed, not your mind. It functions. But it doesn't stick. You know this feeling. It's nostalgia for something you didn't quite live. Familiarity with nothing specific. The eerie sense that even the intimate has become templated. That's the danger of a frictionless world: it erodes not just creativity, but belief, connection, and identity, not through rupture, but through rehearsal. We're not witnessing liberation. We're watching reality bleed out by degrees. Friction is what interrupts the loop. It's the glitch that reminds you something is off, and makes you care enough to ask why. Friction is the last honest metric. It's what reveals taste. It's what reveals care. It's the difference between something you scroll past and something that stops you. In a world where every brand has access to the same generative tools, the only real differentiator left is discernment, and discernment doesn't scale. It struggles. It questions. It hesitates before hitting publish. This is not about resisting AI. It's about resisting amnesia. It's about building systems—and stories—that let humans stay in the loop long enough to feel what they're making. Friction doesn't just slow us down. It reminds us we still have a choice. When content is optimized to our past behavior, when ads are generated before we know we need them, when every message is invisible in its targeting but intimate in its tone—are we still consenting to what we consume? Consent isn't a checkbox. It's the ability to pause, to question, to say yes with awareness—or no with clarity. But in a frictionless system, consent erodes, not by force, but by design. We don't opt in—we drift in. We don't choose—we scroll. We don't author—we adapt. Friction is what lets us feel that drift. It's the tug that says, this wasn't mine until I made it mine. Without it, influence becomes indistinguishable from control. This isn't just a philosophical distinction. It's an economic one. It's a forecast. Everything on the left can be automated. Everything on the right can't be faked. And that's the opportunity. If you're in marketing, brand, or creative work, this isn't the time to panic. It's time to get precise. Here's how to make yourself irreplaceable inside systems designed to erase you: These aren't productivity hacks. They're AI survival strategies for authorship in an age of automation.
Engadget
an hour ago
- Engadget
How to set up a WhatsApp account without Facebook or Instagram
There's no shortage of reasons to stay off the Meta ecosystem, which includes Facebook and Instagram, but there are some places where WhatsApp remains the main form of text-based communication. The app is a great alternative to SMS, since it offers end-to-end encryption and was one of the go-to methods to send uncompressed photos and videos between iPhone and Android users before Apple adopted RCS. Even though Facebook, which later rebranded to Meta, acquired WhatsApp in 2014, it doesn't require a Facebook or Instagram account to get on WhatsApp — just a working phone number. To start, you need to download WhatsApp on your smartphone. Once you open the app, you can start the registration process by entering a working phone number. After entering your phone number, you'll receive a unique six-digit code that will complete the registration process. From there, you can sort through your contacts on your attached smartphone to build out your WhatsApp network, but you won't have to involve Facebook or Instagram at any point. Alternatively, you can request a voice call to deliver the code instead. Either way, once you complete the registration process, you have a WhatsApp account that's not tied to a Facebook or Instagram account. If you change your mind and want more crossover between your Meta apps, you can go into the app's Settings panel to change that. In Settings, you can find the Accounts Center option with the Meta badge on it. Once you hit it, you'll see options to "Add Facebook account" and "Add Instagram account." Linking these accounts means Meta can offer more personalized experiences across the platforms because of the personal data that's now interconnected. You can always remove your WhatsApp account from Meta's Account Center by going back into the same Settings panel. However, any previously combined info will stay combined, but Meta will stop combining any personal data after you remove the account.
Forbes
4 hours ago
- Forbes
What Investors Should Know As Meta Gets (Back) Into Crypto
Meta (formerly Facebook) is getting back into crypto Markets and investment trends tend to move in cycles, and the cryptoasset sector is no exception to this rule of the marketplace. As TradFi institutions continue to deploy blockchain affiliated projects, including the launch of a stablecoin by SocGen running on the Ethereum blockchain, the adoption and acceleration of cryptoassets continues virtually unabated. Even as the sentiment toward crypto improves, prices of bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies increase, and the policy landscape pivots toward a pro-growth outlook there remain significant obstacles to mainstream utilization. For example, the tax treatment of crypto is an inhibitor to retail utilization of crypto as a method of payment, and the lack of insurance available for crypto and crypto-adjacent products can make it difficult for institutions to allocate substantial funds to cryptoassets. Against this landscape, exemplified both the increasing adoption and understanding of cryptoassets and applications with the continued limitations to institutional usage, one company stands apart for several reasons. Meta (formerly Facebook) recently has been questioned by Senators Warren and Blumenthal related to its support for the GENIUS Act, and specifically whether or not the firm would block a prohibition on Big Tech firms from owning stablecoin issuers. The specifics of the questioning by the senators will most assuredly change over time, but the letter that has been made publicly available detail that the senators desire specifics as to what the stablecoin plans for Meta are. Let's take a look at why this letter and these questions are important, not only for Meta, but for the cryptoasset marketplace at large. Meta, then operating as Facebook, already attempted to launch of a native stablecoin in 2019 via the Libra project which was subsequently rebranded as Diem. This previous effort occurred during an entirely different economic and policy landscape, and occurred as the organization was still contending with intense scrutiny following the 2016 U.S. Presidential election. Issues that were raised at the time dealt with the potential of a stablecoin issued by Facebook serving to weaken competition, compromise user privacy, and lead to continued fractionalization of which entity or organization sets policy for U.S. monetary and fiscal policy. While the cryptoasset landscape and policy outlook for crypto projects has definitively shifted to a more permissive stance the very same issues that were raised during 2019 loom large as Meta returns to the stablecoin marketplace. Specifically, the letter from the Senators cited the track record of privacy violations, scams, and fake news that continue to occur on the platform as risks that a native stablecoin could amplify. Even as stablecoins increasingly become more mainstream, and are approaching a market capitalization nearing $300 billion, Meta might find many of the same issues that stymied earlier efforts being dragged back to the surface. Since Meta is one of the few returning players to the stablecoin space this provides an opportunity for crypto native stablecoins such as Circle, which continues to ride high following its IPO in June. As Meta edges closer to launching its own stablecoin, the spotlight on Big Tech's role in digital money is about to get a lot brighter, especially as these same tech firms continue to invest billions in AI initiatives. For crypto-native firms like Circle, that's not a threat - it's an opportunity. Meta's sheer size and complicated history with data privacy all but guarantee it will draw intense regulatory scrutiny. And that scrutiny will set a new bar for how stablecoins are viewed and governed both in the U.S. and abroad. That's where Circle can shine. Unlike tech giants pivoting into payments, Circle was built in crypto — with regulatory engagement and transparency as core pillars. While Meta faces inevitable trust questions and regulatory hurdles, Circle can double down on its position as the safer, more compliant alternative. In the coming months, expect firms like Circle to lean into this advantage, especially as institutional partners and consumers alike grow more cautious about Big Tech controlling their money. Notably, the ongoing partnership between Circle and Coinbase – two of the largest crypto native firms that are publicly traded in the U.S. – can also serve to assuage concerns of policymakers. Regardless of this specific stablecoin project plays out the following reality is becoming increasingly clear, and some would say urgent, for the crypto marketplace. With tens of billions flowing into the sector, TradFi firms deploying blockchain based solutions and native stablecoins, and policymakers actively debating the GENIUS Act, the crypto audit and attestation narrative continues to seem stuck. While the AICPA continues to issue guidance and updates related to digital asset attestation, controls, and valuation, the authoritative standard setters remain behind the proverbial curve. As stablecoins become more important and integrated with payment, treasury, and lending systems the urgency for definitive and standardized auditing best practices will continue to elevate in importance.
