Live data from Hacker News

Meta Llama 3

llama.meta.com

41–50 of 965 posts

Re: Meta Llama 3

#41

I'm so surprised that Meta is actually leading the open source AI landscape?! I've used llama2 extensively and can't wait to try out llama3 now. I can't believe that it does better than Claude 3 in benchmarks (though admittedly claude 3 seems to have been nerfed recently) I sure do wish there was more info about how its trained and its training data.

> I'm so surprised that Meta is actually leading the open source AI landscape?

Why? Meta has one of the most impressive open source track records out of anyone.

Re: Meta Llama 3

#42

I'm so surprised that Meta is actually leading the open source AI landscape?! I've used llama2 extensively and can't wait to try out llama3 now. I can't believe that it does better than Claude 3 in benchmarks (though admittedly claude 3 seems to have been nerfed recently) I sure do wish there was more info about how its trained and its training data.

Why do people keep saying that Claude3 has been nerfed? Their CTO has said on Twitter multiple times that not a single byte has been changed since its launch, so I'm curious why I keep hearing this. edit: having trouble finding the tweet I saw recently, it might have been from their lead engineer and not the CTO.

It's likely true that they didn't change the model, same for the many claims of GPT-4 getting worse. But they do keep iterating a lot on the "safety" layers on top: classifiers to detect dangerous requests, the main system prompt...

But I also think it's partially a psychological phenomenon, just people getting used to the magic and finding more bad edge-cases as it is used more.

EDIT: It seems that they do claim that the layers on top also didn't change https://twitter.com/alexalbert__/status/1780707227130863674

Re: Meta Llama 3

#43

I'm so surprised that Meta is actually leading the open source AI landscape?! I've used llama2 extensively and can't wait to try out llama3 now. I can't believe that it does better than Claude 3 in benchmarks (though admittedly claude 3 seems to have been nerfed recently) I sure do wish there was more info about how its trained and its training data.

I don't know anything about AI, but I assume they didn't have a choice after Llama was leaked onto 4chan last year.

Re: Meta Llama 3

#45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would the CTO/lead engineer admit that they nerfed the model even if they did? It’s all closed, how does admitting it benefit them? I would much rather trust the people using it everyday.

It's not a random sample of people. You're sampling the 10 most noisy people out of a million users, and those 10 people could be mistaken. Claude 3 hasn't dropped Elo on the lmsys leaderboard which supports the CTO's claim.

Beyond that, to people who interact with the models regularly the "nerf" issue is pretty obvious. It was pretty clear when a new model rollout caused ChatGPT4 to try and stick to the "leadup, answer, explanation" response model and also start to get lazy about longer responses.

Re: Meta Llama 3

#46
post #4

They've got a console for it as well, https://www.meta.ai/ And announcing a lot of integration across the Meta product suite, https://about.fb.com/news/2024/04/meta-ai-assistant-built-wi... Neglected to include comparisons against GPT-4-Turbo or Claude Opus, so I guess it's far from being a frontier model. We'll see how it fares in the LLM Arena.

And they even allow you to use it without logging in. Didnt expect that from Meta.

I do see on the bottom left:

Log in to save your conversation history, sync with Messenger, generate images and more.

Re: Meta Llama 3

#47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do people keep saying that Claude3 has been nerfed? Their CTO has said on Twitter multiple times that not a single byte has been changed since its launch, so I'm curious why I keep hearing this. edit: having trouble finding the tweet I saw recently, it might have been from their lead engineer and not the CTO.

Over yonder: https://x.com/alexalbert__/status/1780707227130863674 my $0.02: it makes me very uncomfortable that people misunderstand LLMs enough to even think this is possible

Of course it is possible. For example via quantization. Unless you are refering to something I can't see in that tweet. (not signed in).

Re: Meta Llama 3

#48

Lots of great details in the blog: https://ai.meta.com/blog/meta-llama-3/ Looks like there's a 400B version coming up that will be much better than GPT-4 and Claude Opus too. Decentralization and OSS for the win!

Where does it say much better than gpt4 for the 400B model?

Re: Meta Llama 3

#49
post #14

Awesome, but I am surprised by the constrained context window as it balloons everywhere else. Am I missing something? 8k seems quite low in current landscape.

Honestly, I swear to god, been working 12 hours a day with these for a year now, llama.cpp, Claude, OpenAI, Mistral, Gemini:

The long context window isn't worth much and is currently creating more problems than it's worth for the bigs, with their "unlimited" use pricing models.

Let's take Claude 3's web UI as an example. We build it, and go the obvious route: we simply use as much of the context as possible, given chat history.

Well, now once you're 50-100K tokens in, the initial prefill takes forever, O(10 seconds). Now we have to display a warning whenever that is the case.

Now we're generating an extreme amount of load on GPUs for prefill, and it's extremely unlikely it's helpful. Writing code? Previous messages are likely to be ones that needed revisions. The input cost is ~$0.02 / 1000 tokens and it's not arbitrary/free, prefill is expensive and on the GPU.

Less expensive than inference, but not that much. So now we're burning ~$2 worth of GPU time for the 100K conversation. And all of the bigs use a pricing model of a flat fee per month.

Now, even our _paid_ customers have to take message limits on all our models. (this is true, Anthropic quietly introduced them end of last week)

Functionally:

Output limit is 4096 tokens, so tasks that are a map function (ex. reword Moby Dick in Zoomer), need the input split into 4096 tokens anyway.

The only use cases I've seen thus far that _legitimately_ benefit are needle in a haystack stuff, video with Gemini, or cases with huuuuuge inputs and small outputs, like, put 6.5 Harry Potter books into Gemini and get a Mermaid diagram out connecting characters.

Re: Meta Llama 3

#50

I'm so surprised that Meta is actually leading the open source AI landscape?! I've used llama2 extensively and can't wait to try out llama3 now. I can't believe that it does better than Claude 3 in benchmarks (though admittedly claude 3 seems to have been nerfed recently) I sure do wish there was more info about how its trained and its training data.

Meta has the massive advantage of not needing to sell the AI. The primary purpose of Llama is to make Facebook, Instagram, Whatsapp, Quest etc. better (well, "better" from the perspective of the company). It is basically an internal tool. So just like React, Cassandra, PyTorch, GraphQL, HHVM and all of their other open source work they benefit from sharing it with the rest of the world. There is very little incremental cost, and they get to generate massive goodwill and attract talent because of it.
Post reply on HN