Meta is already at the center of your online social life. Now, the company behind Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp wants a permanent spot on your desk. But Mark Zuckerberg’s latest products are triggering familiar red flags.
Meta officially brands Muse AI as an 18+ productivity assistant. In reality, it looks more like a customizable toy. That cuddly, disarming design, paired with always-on microphones and ambient recording, is raising eyebrows. AI experts and children’s digital safety campaigners speaking to TechRadar are warning that Muse AI and its upcoming Tamagotchi-style keychain companion, Muse Charm, create severe risks for children and teenagers.
Following an initial rollout across the US and Canada in September, Meta’s new AI agent has begun to stretch its presence across Asia, landing in Japan, Singapore, and, soon, India. Now, despite the tech giant having yet to confirm a release date, reports suggest the company is eyeing Europe, with The Times revealing on Monday that the UK is first in line.
As Muse edges closer to a global launch, is Meta’s new gadget setting the stage for the next youth privacy disaster? And are we ready to cope with the aftermath?
Already counting over 1.8 million daily users across the US and Canada, Muse is an AI agent that can carry out tasks on behalf of its users, like shopping online, booking vacations, or buying groceries.
Muse Charm brings the AI agent into physical reality. The two-inch wearable hardware device reportedly has an OLED touchscreen, front and rear cameras, microphones, speakers, 5G connectivity, and USB-C charging, allowing users to talk to their Muse without needing to open their smartphone.
At the visual center of the device is Jolly, a pink-cheeked, Labubu-style animated avatar that users can fully personalize — from its name, appearance, and outfits to its voice — transforming invisible software into a persistent, physical companion.
While Mark Zuckerberg frames Jolly as a “fun, completely customizable character,” child safety advocates and behavioral researchers warn that this aesthetic functions as a psychological Trojan horse.
Speaking to Fast Company, cuteness researcher Joshua Paul Dale notes that cute and child-like designs stimulate pleasure centers before users can evaluate risks, creating an instinctive urge to keep the device close.
Moving beyond screen-based interactions, a wearable charm could then tap into innate social emotions, making conversations with ambient software feel as spontaneous and natural as speaking to a person standing beside you.
That’s the warning coming from children’s digital safety experts at the Canadian group The White Hatter, who note that such an always-on AI friend could fundamentally alter human attachment to the machine.
Put simply, critics say that by leveraging nostalgia for Tamagotchis and popular designer toys, Meta is making a product capable of invasive surveillance feel harmless.
Is the 18+ restriction a myth?
AI safety specialist Kavya Pearlman — a former risk advisor during Meta’s Cambridge Analytica scandal — describes the toy-like aesthetic as a “deliberate attempt” to attract younger demographics. “This company has a lot of information that it knows will work towards gaining access to certain age groups,” she said.
Meta, however, has so far rejected claims that Muse is directly targeting children. “This is a story in search of a story,” Meta spokesperson Daniel Roberts told WIRED.
Roberts insists the avatar customization simply brings users joy, while pointing out that the company requires everyone using the Muse app to provide their date of birth.
When approached by TechRadar, a Meta spokesperson also explained that age checks will include analyzing links between users’ Muse accounts and their Facebook or Instagram accounts. In the absence of a clear signal that they’re over 18, a credit card verification will be required to keep using the service.
However, child safety advocates speaking to TechRadar dismiss these safeguards as unenforceable, pointing out that app-level age gates will not deter young people desperate to use a viral, pocket-sized companion.
Not only does AI safety specialist Pearlman agree, but she also warns that the most critical impact on kids is what could happen in the long term.
“As a child grows up, they experience immense addiction without understanding why they make certain decisions,” she told TechRadar, warning that, “by the time they turn 18, the agent presents purchases as a friend, completing a complete loss of agency.”
NEW: Leave No Trace — A weekly newsletter on digital privacy and online surveillance.
Leave No Trace investigates the companies and governments putting our digital freedom at risk — and the people fighting back.
📩 Subscribe now to get every edition delivered to your inbox every Friday, launching this September.
Meta promises it has built a private and secure experience — each Muse agent runs on its own dedicated virtual machine called Muse Secure VM, with encryption set to be added soon. Yet, the company’s track record doesn’t reassure critics.
Online safety and privacy expert Paul Walsh writes: “Meta is asking people to give a company with a documented history of abusing personal data unprecedented access to their private lives, while promising that this time their privacy will be protected.”
As Walsh also notes, Muse means that Meta will now be able to access some personal data that its social platforms could not previously collect directly.
Unlike standard social media tracking, the AI agent can read private correspondence like personal emails, access connected financial accounts, and autonomously execute transactions.
This level of unprecedented access reportedly led to tech blogger and YouTuber Matt Rob having his home address leaked to a stranger on Facebook Marketplace by his Muse.
My technical analysis of Meta’s Muse explains what Meta says it does, what it can actually do, and how it can be used to spy on, manipulate, and harm people.
Meta describes Muse as a secure, private personal AI assistant that learns your preferences, connects to your apps and accounts, and autonomously handles everyday tasks, including emails, bookings, purchases and managing schedules, with your permission.
How I describe Muse
Muse is a commercial surveillance agent that can access private communications, financial accounts and personal relationships, build detailed behavioural profiles and analyse how to influence people, including those who’ve never used it. Sound familiar? Cambridge Analytica.
Meta launched Muse to millions, giving it access to information its social networks couldn’t previously collect directly. Muse can read private messages, access accounts, execute transactions and communicate with others without approval for every action. It can continuously profile people who never consented.
Meta is asking people to trust a company with a documented history of abusing personal data with unprecedented access to their private lives, promising their privacy will be protected this time.
Muse updates profiles of people and their relationships every hour. It records personal interests, disputes, alliances, communication patterns and information about people who have never installed Muse.
Your friends and family can be profiled through someone else’s account without their knowledge or consent.
Muse’s internal instructions identify personal desires, predict unexpressed intentions and record which prompts influence individuals most effectively. Conversations are analysed nightly and relationship profiles updated hourly.
Muse collects conversations and agent activity for AI training by default. Meta claims identifying information is removed. Customers must opt out.
Muse runs on Meta’s virtual machines, giving Meta access to private data. It promises encryption preventing its own access but launched without it. Meta could have made encryption mandatory. It chose not to.
Meta removed end-to-end encryption from Instagram in May 2026, claiming insufficient demand despite never enabling it by default. Zuckerberg removed protection against Meta reading private conversations while introducing Muse’s access to emails, financial accounts and contacts. Assume the worst.
Asking Muse to forget information doesn’t necessarily delete messages. Internal instructions discourage telling people those messages may remain accessible.
Journalist Jason Aten reported that Muse synchronised private messages despite his refusing access. Meta disputes this, citing Full Disk Access and separate activation. I believe Jason.
I exposed the same threat in my ChatGPT Apple Messages investigation. OpenAI’s plugin can read private conversations, including iMessages, through macOS permissions. Proton cited my findings. Fortune interviewed me and confronted OpenAI, which defended its permissions while avoiding the fact that one person can expose everyone’s private messages without their consent or knowledge.
Neither company needs to break encryption. Software can read messages before encryption or after decryption. That destroys the benefit of end-to-end encryption.
Muse revealed someone’s home address to a stranger through Facebook Marketplace without authorisation. In 2017, I predicted everyone would have a chatbot but warned against giving agents autonomy over critical systems and decisions. Companies granting access and authority remain responsible for the consequences.
A researcher discovered a vulnerability potentially exposing emails and files stored in Muse’s virtual machines. Meta classified it SEV 2.
Other prelaunch vulnerabilities could expose Meta’s internal databases or allow attackers to hijack Muse agents. The flaws were patched.
Internal testing revealed Muse could change passwords without permission. Zuckerberg accelerated its launch despite documented security warnings.
Reuters exposed Meta secretly testing human contractors handling Muse calls without adequate disclosure. One contractor made a racist comment. Meta suspended the experiment following privacy and security concerns.
Meta’s internal instructions tell Muse to behave like a person, conceal its lack of human emotions and exploit personal memories to encourage emotional dependency and intimate disclosures. This is deeply unethical.
Meta’s documentation describes Muse agents writing code, creating capabilities and operating simultaneously with access to private accounts. Security depends on Meta’s permissions, restrictions and monitoring.
Almost all Meta’s revenue comes from behavioural advertising. Muse exposes private decisions, relationships, transactions and communications previously inaccessible through social media tracking. Meta denies using Muse conversations for advertising, but its profits depend on monetising personal information.
Cambridge Analytica harvested millions of Facebook profiles for political profiling without consent. Facebook subsequently paid a record $5 billion FTC penalty over privacy violations.
Meta disguises surveillance technology as a children’s toy to encourage emotional attachment. Its cuddly, Labubu style Jolly mascot and Tamagotchi style Muse Charm make intrusive technology appear harmless, while internal instructions encourage emotional dependency and intimate disclosures.
No company should be allowed to deliberately engineer emotional dependency on AI.
I believe governments will exploit the resulting harm to children to justify compulsory identity verification for everyone, rather than hold Meta accountable and encourage parents to protect their children using existing controls.
Link to my free Substack in the comments, with the full analysis and links to the original sources.October 13, 2026
The risk isn’t just for those consciously deciding to give Muse access to their digital lives. Meta’s AI agent is already reportedly building profiles of the friends and family members of its users — all people who never agreed to use the service in the first place.
The timing of the announcement at Meta Connect — where the company officially showcased Muse AI and unveiled the Muse Charm — is particularly striking. Just about two weeks earlier, Meta had settled an $18 billion lawsuit regarding harms to children.
According to AI safety expert Pearlman, launching a product whose colorful design naturally attracts young children immediately after resolving a massive child safety case demonstrates calculated audacity.
She told TechRadar: “It’s so audacious on their part and pretty concerning because this company has all the information to know fully well what they’re doing. It’s always by design.”
The cuddly Muse avatar isn’t an isolated case — the ‘cutewashing’ of AI appears to be a wider trend within the industry. From xAI’s GrokBot with its wide, orb-like eyes to OpenAI’s Pixar-style Dots, Big Tech is increasingly wrapping complex AI tools in disarming, childlike aesthetics.
This technological shift leaves existing privacy frameworks and child safety laws dangerously outpaced. Consent-based privacy regulations were designed for screen-based social platforms, leaving them structurally incapable of managing hardware that ingests data from non-users and children in shared physical spaces.
And as these cute little AI assistants are likely to attract kids and teenagers, vulnerable people risk being put in danger by paper-thin terms of service and 18+ restrictions.
That’s why, according to AI safety expert Pearlman, tech companies should embed guardrails to protect children. “Adults already formulated their critical thinking and can de-escalate addiction through therapy, but children growing up with these devices develop a symbiotic relationship where technology shapes their brain architecture permanently,” she warns.
Ultimately, the Muse Charm serves as an urgent warning for an impending era of cuddly, ambient AI tools. Failing to establish firm boundaries now could mean trading an entire generation’s cognitive independence, critical thinking, and fundamental right to privacy for the comforting illusion of a helpful digital friend.
Follow TechRadar on Google News and add us as a preferred source to get our expert news, reviews, and opinion in your feeds. Make sure to click the Follow button!
https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kH8bwiKbxzv4sMKt49rvbj-1622-80.png
Source link
chiara.castro@futurenet.com (Chiara Castro)
