Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Open source AI is the path forward

about.fb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 936 posts

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#241

Post by throwaway_2494 »

cs702 wrote: post #74

> We’re releasing Llama 3.1 405B, the first frontier-level open source AI model, as well as new and improved Llama 3.1 70B and 8B models. Bravo! While I don't agree with Zuck's views and actions on many fronts, on this occasion I think he and the AI folks at Meta deserve our praise and gratitude. With this release, they have brought the cost of pretraining a frontier 400B+ parameter model to ZERO for pretty much ever…

> We’re releasing Llama 3.1 405B

Is it possible to run this with ollama?

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#242

Post by freeone3000 »

whimsicalism wrote: post #192
rvnx wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the case of NVIDIA it's even more sneaky. They are an intellectual property company holding the rights on plans to make graphic cards, not even a company actually making graphic cards. The government could launch an initiative "OpenGPU" or "OpenAI Accelerator", where the government orders GPUs from TSMC directly, without the middleman. It may require some tweaking in the law to allow exception to intellectual prop…

y'all really don't understand how these actions would seriously harm capital markets and make it difficult for private capital formation to produce innovations going forward.

If we have public capital formation, we don’t necessarily need private capital. Private innovation in weather modelling isn’t outpacing government work by leaps and bounds, for instance.

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#246

Post by bufferoverflow »

Hard disagree. So far every big important model is closed-source. Grok is sort-of the only exception, and it's not even that big compared to the (already old) GPT-4.

I don't see open source being able to compete with the cutting-edge proprietary models. There's just not enough money. GPT-5 will take an estimated $1.2 billion to train. MS and OpenAI are already talking about building a $100 billion training data center.

How can you compete with that if your plan is to give away the training result for free?

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#248

Post by JumpCrisscross »

gpm wrote: post #236
whimsicalism wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because whether they make 100x or 200x they make a shitload of money. It's not a certainty that they 'make a shitload of money'. Reducing the right tail payoffs absolutely reduces the capital allocated to solve problems - many of which are risky bets . Your solution absolutely decreases capital investment at the margin, this is indisputable and basic economics. Even worse when the taking is not due to some pre-exis…

You can't just look at the costs to an action, you also have to look at the benefits. Of course I agree I'm going to stop marginal investments from occurring into research into patent-able technologies by reducing the expect profit. But I'm going to do so very slightly because I'm not shifting the expected value by very much. Meanwhile I'm going to greatly increase the investment into the existing technology we alrea…

> I'm going to do so very slightly because I'm not shifting the expected value by very much

You're massively increasing uncertainty.

> the same would happen in the future. And the trade-off I get for this is that society gets the benefit

Why would you expect it would ever happen again? What you want is an unrealized capital gains tax. Not to nuke our semiconductor industry.

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#249

Post by NewJazz »

fweimer wrote: post #52
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #7

“The Heavy Press Program was a Cold War-era program of the United States Air Force to build the largest forging presses and extrusion presses in the world.” This ”program began in 1944 and concluded in 1957 after construction of four forging presses and six extruders, at an overall cost of $279 million. Six of them are still in operation today, manufacturing structural parts for military and commercial aircraft” [1].…

Don't these public clusters exist today, and have been around for decades at this point, with varying architectures? In the sense that you submit a proposal, it gets approved, and then you get access for your research?

This is the most recent iteration of a national platform. They have tons of GPUs (and CPUs, and flash storage) hooked up as a Kubernetes cluster, available for teaching and research.

https://nationalresearchplatform.org/

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#250

Post by kube-system »

rvnx wrote: post #43
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Doubtful that GPUs purchased today would be in use for a similar time scale Totally agree. That doesn't mean it can't generate massive ROI. > Govt investment would also drive the cost of GPUs up a great deal Difficult to say this ex ante . On its own, yes. But it would displace some demand. And it could help boost chip production in the long run. > Not sure why a publicly accessible GPU cluster would be a better so…

It would be better that the government removes IP on such technology for public use, like drugs got generics. This way the government pays 2'500 USD per card, not 40'000 USD or whatever absurd.

> It would be better that the government removes IP on such technology for public use, like drugs got generics.

20-25 year old drugs are a lot more useful than 20-25 year old GPUs, and the manufacturing supply chain is not a bottleneck.

There's no generics for the latest and greatest drugs, and a fancy gene therapy might run a lot more than $40k.

Post reply on HN