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

441–450 of 936 posts

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#441

Post by blackeyeblitzar »

stavros wrote: post #425
causal wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Open weights" is a more appropriate term but I'll point out that these weights are also largely inscrutable to the people with the code that trained it. And for licensing reasons, the datasets may not be possible to share. There is still a lot of modifying you can do with a set of weights, and they make great foundations for new stuff, but yeah we may never see a competitive model that's 100% buildable at home. Edit…

"Open weights" means you can use the weights for free (as in beer). "Open source" means you get the training dataset and the methodology. ~Nobody does open source LLMs.

There is a comment elsewhere claiming there are a few dozen fully open source models: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41048796

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#442

Post by systemvoltage »

jameson wrote: post #435

It's hard to say Llama is an "open source" when their license states Meta has full control under certain circumstances https://raw.githubusercontent.com/meta-llama/llama-models/ma... > 2. Additional Commercial Terms. If, on the Llama 3.1 version release date, the monthly active users of the products or services made available by or for Licensee, or Licensee’s affiliates, is greater than 700 million monthly active use…

Tbh, it’s incredibly generous.

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#443

Post by [deleted] »

jameson wrote: post #435

It's hard to say Llama is an "open source" when their license states Meta has full control under certain circumstances https://raw.githubusercontent.com/meta-llama/llama-models/ma... > 2. Additional Commercial Terms. If, on the Llama 3.1 version release date, the monthly active users of the products or services made available by or for Licensee, or Licensee’s affiliates, is greater than 700 million monthly active use…

[deleted]

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#444

Post by [deleted] »

jameson wrote: post #435

It's hard to say Llama is an "open source" when their license states Meta has full control under certain circumstances https://raw.githubusercontent.com/meta-llama/llama-models/ma... > 2. Additional Commercial Terms. If, on the Llama 3.1 version release date, the monthly active users of the products or services made available by or for Licensee, or Licensee’s affiliates, is greater than 700 million monthly active use…

[deleted]

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#445

Post by apwell23 »

__loam wrote: post #439
jameson wrote: post #435

It's hard to say Llama is an "open source" when their license states Meta has full control under certain circumstances https://raw.githubusercontent.com/meta-llama/llama-models/ma... > 2. Additional Commercial Terms. If, on the Llama 3.1 version release date, the monthly active users of the products or services made available by or for Licensee, or Licensee’s affiliates, is greater than 700 million monthly active use…

It should be transparently clear that this move was taken by Meta to drive their competitors out of business in a capital intensive space.

not sure how it drives competitors out of business. OpenAI is losing money on queries not on model creation. This opensource model has no impact of their business model of charging users money to run queries.

on a side note OpenAI is losing users on its own. It doesn't need meta to put it out of business.

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#446

Post by solarmist »

_heimdall wrote: post #436
stavros wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Open weights" means you can use the weights for free (as in beer). "Open source" means you get the training dataset and the methodology. ~Nobody does open source LLMs.

Why is the dataset required for it to be open source? If I self host a project that is open sourced rather than paying for a hosted version, like Sentry.io for example, I don't expect data to come along with the code. Licensing rights are always up for debate in open source, but I wouldn't expect more than the code to be available and reviewable for anything needed to build and run the project. In the case of an LLM…

The sticking point is you can’t build the model. To be able to build the model from scratch you need methodology and a complete description of the data set.

They only give you a blob of data you can run.

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#447

Post by sterlind »

kertoip_1 wrote: post #428
light_triad wrote: post #354

They are positioning themselves as champions of AI open source mostly because they were blindsided by OpenAI, are not in the infra game, and want to commoditize their complements as much as possible. This is not altruism although it's still great for devs and startups. All FB GPU investments is primarily for new AI products "friends", recommendations and selling ads. https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy…

They are giving it "for free" because: * they need LLMs that they can control for features on their platforms (Fb/Instagram, but I can see many use cases on VR too) * they cannot sell it. They have no cloud services to offer. So they would spend this money anyways, but to compensate some losses they just decided to use it to fix their PR by contenting developers

They also reap the benefits of AI researchers across the world using Llama as a base. All their research is immediately applicable to their models. It's also likely a strategic decision to reduce the moat OpenAI is building around itself.

I also think LeCunn opposes OpenAI's gatekeeping at a philosophical/political level. He's using his position to strengthen open-source AI. Sure, there's strategic business considerations, but I wouldn't rule out principled motivations too.

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#448

Post by sigmoid10 »

stavros wrote: post #425
causal wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Open weights" is a more appropriate term but I'll point out that these weights are also largely inscrutable to the people with the code that trained it. And for licensing reasons, the datasets may not be possible to share. There is still a lot of modifying you can do with a set of weights, and they make great foundations for new stuff, but yeah we may never see a competitive model that's 100% buildable at home. Edit…

"Open weights" means you can use the weights for free (as in beer). "Open source" means you get the training dataset and the methodology. ~Nobody does open source LLMs.

>Nobody does open source LLMs.

There are a bunch of independent, fully open source foundation models from companies that share everything (including all data). AMBER and MAP-NEO for example. But we have yet to see one in the 100B+ parameter category.

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#449

Post by stavros »

sigmoid10 wrote: post #448
stavros wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Open weights" means you can use the weights for free (as in beer). "Open source" means you get the training dataset and the methodology. ~Nobody does open source LLMs.

>Nobody does open source LLMs. There are a bunch of independent, fully open source foundation models from companies that share everything (including all data). AMBER and MAP-NEO for example. But we have yet to see one in the 100B+ parameter category.

Sorry, the tilde before "nobody" is my notation for "basically nobody" or "almost nobody". I thought it was more common.

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#450

Post by war321 »

Even if it's just open weights and not "true" open source, I'll still give Meta the appreciation of being one of the few big AI companies actually committed to open models. In an ecosystem where groups like Anthropic and OpenAI keep hemming and hawing about safety and the necessity of closed AI systems "for our sake", they stand out among the rest.
Post reply on HN