Live data from Hacker News

NanoChat – The best ChatGPT that $100 can buy

github.com

81–90 of 326 posts

Re: NanoChat – The best ChatGPT that $100 can buy

#82
post #59

Which data uses for training?

karpathy/fineweb-edu-100b-shuffle: https://huggingface.co/datasets/karpathy/fineweb-edu-100b-sh...

Which is derived from HuggingFaceFW/fineweb-edu: https://huggingface.co/datasets/HuggingFaceFW/fineweb-edu

HuggingFaceTB/smol-smoltalk: https://huggingface.co/datasets/HuggingFaceTB/smol-smoltalk

And extra fine-tuning on portions of:

cais/mmlu: https://huggingface.co/datasets/cais/mmlu

openai/gsm8k: https://huggingface.co/datasets/openai/gsm8k

allenai/ai2_arc: https://huggingface.co/datasets/allenai/ai2_arc

Re: NanoChat – The best ChatGPT that $100 can buy

#83
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While documenting a build path is nice, IMHO renting hardware nobody can afford from VC-backed cloud providers using cold hard cash to produce clones of legacy tech using toy datasets under the guise of education is propping up the AI bubble and primarily helping institutional shareholders in those AI bubble companies, particularly their hardware supplier NVidia. Personally I do not see this as helping people or huma…

"This would sit better with me if the repo included a first tier use case for local execution, non-NVidia hardware reference, etc." This is a pretty disheartening way to respond to something like this. Someone puts a great deal of effort into giving something interesting away for free, and is told "you should have also done THIS work for free as well in order for me to value your contribution".

It is an objective and transparent response based on free software world norms. Feel free to interpret differently and to be disheartened. Hell, many of us are disheartened by the AI VC political theater we are seeing right now: experienced programmers, artists, lawyers, perhaps much of humanity. Let's stick to objective elements of the discussion, not emotional opine.

Re: NanoChat – The best ChatGPT that $100 can buy

#84
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A GPU with 80GB VRAM costs around $1-3 USD an hour on commodity clouds (i.e. the non-Big 3 bare metal providers e.g. https://getdeploying.com/reference/cloud-gpu/nvidia-h100 ). I think it's accessible to most middle class users in first world countries.

Isn’t the whole point to run your model locally?

You can run a model locally on much less expensive hardware. It's training that requires the really big GPUs.

Re: NanoChat – The best ChatGPT that $100 can buy

#85

from their promotional material: >> Why is the sky blue? > The sky is blue due to an optical illusion called the Rayleigh Scattering Rayleigh Scattering is not an illusion but an effect. > […] particles are made up of tiny blue and violet particles that cause the light to bend in a particular way. ugh. no, there are no "tiny blue" particles in the sky.

That was the point. That example is meant to demonstrate that the model that trained for 4 hours can imitate a conversation but isn't actually anywhere close to being useful.

Re: NanoChat – The best ChatGPT that $100 can buy

#86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While documenting a build path is nice, IMHO renting hardware nobody can afford from VC-backed cloud providers using cold hard cash to produce clones of legacy tech using toy datasets under the guise of education is propping up the AI bubble and primarily helping institutional shareholders in those AI bubble companies, particularly their hardware supplier NVidia. Personally I do not see this as helping people or huma…

If you can't afford $100 or learn how to train it locally with more time and less money, then this isn't something you should be focusing on at all.

It is amusing to note the dichotomy between the clearly compassionate, empathetic and altruistic perspective displayed here and the comically overstated framing of helping humanity.

Re: NanoChat – The best ChatGPT that $100 can buy

#87
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This free tradition in software is I think one of the things that I love so much, but I don't see how it can continue with LLMs due to the extremely high training costs and the powerful hardware required for inference. It just seems like writing software will necessarily require paying rent to the LLM hosts to keep up. I guess it's possible that we'll figure out a way to do local inference in a way that is accessible…

There's a Stephen Boyd quote that's something like "if your optimization problem is too computationally expensive, just go on vacation to Greece for a few weeks and by the time you get back, computers might be fast enough to solve it." With LLMs there's sort of an equivalent situation with cost: how mindblowing would it be able to train this kind of LLM at all even just 4 years ago? And today you can get a kindergart…

> today you can get a kindergartener level chat model for about $100. Not hard to imagine the same model costing $10 of compute in a few years.

No, it's extremely hard to imagine since I used one of Karpathy's own models to have a basic chat bot like six years ago. Yes, it spoke nonsense; so did my GPT-2 fine tune four years ago and so does this.

And so does ChatGPT

Improvement is linear at best. I still think it's actually a log curve and GPT3 was the peak of the "fun" part of the curve. The only evidence I've seen otherwise is bullshit benchmarks, "agents" that increase performance 2x by increasing token usage 100x, and excited salesmen proclaiming the imminence of AGI

Re: NanoChat – The best ChatGPT that $100 can buy

#90
post #42

So could I in practice train it on all my psychology books, materials, reports, case study and research papers and then run it on demand on a 1xH100 node - https://getdeploying.com/reference/cloud-gpu/nvidia-h100 whenever I have a specialised question?

You could do that indeed, but the performance would be abysmal. For this kind of use-case, it would be a LOT better to use a small pre-trained model and either fine-tune it on your materials, or use some kind of RAG workflow (possibly both).

> it would be a LOT better to use a small pre-trained model and either fine-tune it on your materials, or use some kind of RAG workflow (possibly both).

I noticed NewRelic has a chat feature that does this sort of thing, it's scoped very narrowly down to their website and analytics DSL language, and generates charts/data from their db. I've always wondered how they did that (specifically in terms of set up the training/RAG + guardrails). It's super useful.

Post reply on HN