81–90 of 909 posts
Meta's goal with Llama was to target OpenAI with a "scorched earth" approach by releasing powerful open models to disrupt the competitive landscape. Looks like OpenAI is now using the same playbook.
So this confirms a best-in-class model release within the next few days? From a strategic perspective, I can't think of any reason they'd release this unless they were about to announce something which totally eclipses it?
Given it's only around 5 billion active params it shouldn't be a competitor to o3 or any of the other SOTA models, given the top Deepseek and Qwen models have around 30 billion active params. Unless OpenAI somehow found a way to make a model with 5 billion active params perform as well as one with 4-8 times more.
So this confirms a best-in-class model release within the next few days? From a strategic perspective, I can't think of any reason they'd release this unless they were about to announce something which totally eclipses it?
The question is how much better the new model(s) will need to be on the metrics given here to feel comfortable making these available.
Despite the loss of face for lack of open model releases, I do not think that was a big enough problem t undercut commercial offerings.
Holy smokes, there's already llama.cpp support: https://github.com/ggml-org/llama.cpp/pull/15091
Does anyone get the demos at https://www.gpt-oss.com to work, or are the servers down immediately after launch? I'm only getting the spinner after prompting.
Our backend is falling over from the load, spinning up more resources!
Please don't use the open-source term unless you ship the TBs of data downloaded from Anna's Archive that are required do build it yourself. And dont forget all the system prompts to censor the multiple topics that they don't want you to see.
Is your point really that- "I need to see all data downloaded to make this model, before I can know it is open"? Do you have $XXB worth of GPU time to ingest that data with a state of the art framework to make a model? I don't. Even if I did, I'm not sure FB or Google are in any better position to claim this model is or isn't open beyond the fact that the weights are there. They're giving you a free model. You can ev…
Historically this would be like calling a free but closed-source application "open source" simply because the application is free.
Please don't use the open-source term unless you ship the TBs of data downloaded from Anna's Archive that are required do build it yourself. And dont forget all the system prompts to censor the multiple topics that they don't want you to see.
Is your point really that- "I need to see all data downloaded to make this model, before I can know it is open"? Do you have $XXB worth of GPU time to ingest that data with a state of the art framework to make a model? I don't. Even if I did, I'm not sure FB or Google are in any better position to claim this model is or isn't open beyond the fact that the weights are there. They're giving you a free model. You can ev…
Rough analogy:
SaaS = AI as a service
Locally executable closed-source software = open-weight model
Open-source software = open-source model (whatever allows to reproduce the model from training data)