331–340 of 562 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If your "visual acuity" is so good that you can see the pixels of a retina-branded display from the intended viewing distance, you might need to be studied for science.
It's not so impossible to spot flaws if you're using worst-case testing scenarios. Which are not worthless because such patterns do actually pop up in real world usage, albeit rarely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the EU the market share is 30%
Yes but not evenly distributed, BeNeLux, Germany, Austria, and Nordic countries have a lot of iPhone users, while moving further east (or south) you see lower market share. Maybe it’s “two handfuls” of wealthy western countries rather than just one, but I think OPs point holds true.
I hope, this could mean Apple will push the baseline of ALL Macs to have higher than 8GB of Memory. While I wish we all get 16GB M4 as baseline. Apple being Apple may only give us 12GB, and charges extra $100 for the 16GB option. It will still be a lot better than 8GB though.
It probably will change. Note that, so far, a 16GB apple device has much better usability than the equivalent on windows. This may sound biased, but the memory compression and foreground/background actions by macOS tight integration with the hardware is really good. I've never felt like I couldn't do things on smaller hardware, except (larges) LLMs. Also when I compare with my co-workers the memory pressure is a lot…
For people interested in AI research, there's nothing new here. IMO they should do a better job of referencing existing papers and techniques. The way they wrote about "adaptors" can make it seem like it's something novel, but it's actually just re-iterating vanilla LoRA. It was enough to convince one of the top-voted HackerNews comments that this was a "huge development". Benchmarks are nice though.
Just want to point out I call this launch huge, didn’t say “huge development” as quoted, and didn’t imply what was interesting was the ML research. No one in this thread used the quoted words, at least that I can see.
My comment was about dev experience, memory swapping, potential for tuning base models to each HW release, fine tune deployment, and app size. Those things do have the potential to be huge for developers, as mentioned. They are the things that will make a local+private ML developer ecosystem work.
I think the article and comment make sense in their context: a developer conference for Mac and iOS devs.
Apple also explicitly says it’s LoRA.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the EU the market share is 30%
Yes but not evenly distributed, BeNeLux, Germany, Austria, and Nordic countries have a lot of iPhone users, while moving further east (or south) you see lower market share. Maybe it’s “two handfuls” of wealthy western countries rather than just one, but I think OPs point holds true.
How do they represent users around the globe authentically while being located in Cupertino, CA? (more of a rhetorical question really)
“We utilize adapters, small neural network modules that can be plugged into various layers of the pre-trained model, to fine-tune our models for specific tasks.” This is huuuuge. I don’t see announcement of 3rd party training support yet, but I imagine/hope it’s planned. One of the hard things about local+private ML is I don’t want every app I download to need GBs of weights, and don’t want a delay when I open a new…
This is how Google is doing it too.
But kinda as expected: only works on 2 android phones (pixel 8 pro, S24).
Pretty typical: Apple isn’t first, but also typically will scale faster with HW+platform integration.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
llama 3 definitely beats it, but 99% of the users wont care which is actually a good thing... apple totally wins the ai market not by being sota but by sheer amount of devices which will be running their models, we're talking billions
How is any of this good? Apple serves its captive users inferior models without giving them a choice. I don't see how that is winning the AI market either.
Thats far from being "inferior" when you are talking about tuning for specific tasks, let alone when taking into account real-world constraints - like running as a local always-running task on resource-constrained mobile devices.
Running third party models means requiring them to accomplish the same tasks. Since the adapters are LORA-based, they are not adaptable to a different base model. This pushes a lot of specialized requirements onto someone hoping to replace the on-device portion.
This is different from say externally hosted models such as their announced ChatGPT integration. They announced an intention to integrate with other providers, but it is not clear yet how that is intended to work (none of this stuff is released yet even in alpha form).
For people interested in AI research, there's nothing new here. IMO they should do a better job of referencing existing papers and techniques. The way they wrote about "adaptors" can make it seem like it's something novel, but it's actually just re-iterating vanilla LoRA. It was enough to convince one of the top-voted HackerNews comments that this was a "huge development". Benchmarks are nice though.
This gives me the vibe of calling high resolution screens as "retina" screens.