Live data from Hacker News

Sharing new research, models, and datasets from Meta FAIR

ai.meta.com

21–30 of 68 posts

Re: Sharing new research, models, and datasets from Meta FAIR

#21
post #17

Crazy stuff. Everyone’s covering how exciting all these are (especially LCM and the non-tokenizing-tokenizer), but I have to ask in case anyone’s been paying attention: why are they using the term “advanced machine intelligence”? My initial thought is that they want to please/distract the doomers, but I’m prolly just self-centered!

It originates in Yann LeCunn’s paper from 2022 [1], the term AMI being district from AGI. However, the A has changed over the past few years from autonomous to advanced and even augmented, depending on context

[1] https://openreview.net/pdf?id=BZ5a1r-kVsf

Re: Sharing new research, models, and datasets from Meta FAIR

#26
post #24

When I wonder about the business behind Meta doing this, I see they have $70B in cash, so giving a bunch of AI experts hundreds of millions is pocket change.

“Commoditize you complement” may be a good way of framing it. Consider that if OpenAI succeeds dramatically and is the only game in town, they could extract huge rents for anyone using their service. So it’s in other companies interests (or anyone who wants to use AI) that the AI ecosystem have lots of competition to keep prices low.

Re: Sharing new research, models, and datasets from Meta FAIR

#27
post #23

Meta's "Video Seal": Because nothing says "trustworthy" like a digital chastity belt. Imperceptible, they claim, yet robust enough to survive the gauntlet of internet mangling - sounds like the perfect tool to invisibly track content, not just watermark it.

I want to have a way to detect if content is AI generated. You might want to run that model on your own creations to ensure you get the credit for them and that no one can steal them.

Re: Sharing new research, models, and datasets from Meta FAIR

#28
post #24

When I wonder about the business behind Meta doing this, I see they have $70B in cash, so giving a bunch of AI experts hundreds of millions is pocket change.

Imagine that something fundamental shifts in the world of AI research. It could be anything: AI suddenly makes programmers much more productive, AI becomes very good at identifying vulnerabilities, AI chat becomes a new major source of entertainment, AI images become an item popularly shared on Instagram (etc)

Suppose any one of these things happened and suddenly Facebook wished that it had access to state of the art models so that it could customize them for its uses (internal developers or tools, embedding in their app).

Imagine how they would feel if the only way they could access these models were by signing 7-9 figure deals with a model dealer like OpenAI. Even worse, imagine if one of their main competitors in advertising started providing robust AI tools to help advertisers adapt their creatives to various form factors. Facebook is now way behind and possibly has to shell out millions to a company like OpenAI all while also losing ad market share worth billions per quarter (ads on Google start performing much better, so Google gets more ad spend)

If this worst case scenario came to pass, Facebook would look foolish. If even one of these things were likely their investments make sense. The rest (open source, make meta a cool place to work) are a strategy credit.

Re: Sharing new research, models, and datasets from Meta FAIR

#29
post #4

meta has certainly redeemed itself and helping AI become moat-free

They still ruin society with the Facebook, no matter how much good they do with LLM.

Like it or not Meta is a major player in AI world with its free models and tools.

As for social impact of the rest it's debatable. I personally don't have active social accounts, and not sure this is good.

Re: Sharing new research, models, and datasets from Meta FAIR

#30
post #17

Crazy stuff. Everyone’s covering how exciting all these are (especially LCM and the non-tokenizing-tokenizer), but I have to ask in case anyone’s been paying attention: why are they using the term “advanced machine intelligence”? My initial thought is that they want to please/distract the doomers, but I’m prolly just self-centered!

I think Lecun doesn't like the term AGI.
Post reply on HN