what if grok went open source and was on par with open chinese models? the business play may not be the models themselves but owning the data centers and running infrastructure for all models from all companies? a lot of people could then be rooting for xai and elon could ironically save face by actually implementing an open model
Open source AI must win
241–250 of 538 posts
Re: Open source AI must win
#242I'm assuming this is popular because of Fable restrictions. AFAIK, open source is not excluded from ITAR / EAR restrictions (or other export restriction in other countries).
So the real solution you're looking for is technology that can't be arbitrarily gatekept by a sovereign nation.
Re: Open source AI must win
#243Open-source AI can, by definition, never "win". AI is just hillclimbing today, and closed labs can always absorb everything the open world does and build upon it. It doesn't really matter for most use cases, because the way AI is working is capability saturation. https://www.delanceyukschoolschesschallenge.com/the-rising-t... The only exception to this is fields that are inherently adversarial (to nature or others) a…
[dead]
Re: Open source AI must win
#244This will never work - a strong enough LLM model will also let you synthesise bioweapons etc.
How can you release this to public?!
Why else do you think Anthropic is heavily restricting Fable? You can’t just handwave safety concerns.
Re: Open source AI must win
#245Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Then perhaps it should also punch foaming at the mouth libertarians, too. A society that maximizes individual freedom with no guardrails also maximizes freedom for fraudsters, polluters, violent extremists, drunk drivers, kiddie-porn-producing social networking xAIs, and people who use power to dominate others. At that point, the liberty of the strongest starts eroding the liberty of everyone else. Funny how 'current…
[flagged]
Re: Open source AI must win
#246Who is going to fund it? Training is unfathomably expensive. You have either VC funded models looking for a return on investment, or CCP funded models looking to solidify authoritarian "model Chinese society". Maybe there are some university 4B models, but I doubt those will carry far.
Ever calculate the cost of a computer in the 1960s, adjusted for inflation? Training is unfathomably expensive right now . What if a bunch of universities pooled their money? Or a bunch of nations pooled their money? Breakthroughs will eventually happen, optimization will occur, etc. People questioned whether there could ever be a viable open source operating system, yet Linux has been a viable option for a desktop e…
Yes, but have you seen what's happened to hardware improvements over the past 20 years?
From the 1960s to the mid-2000s, every 10 years you'd have a big enough improvement in computing power that you could basically throw out the old computers and replace them with two new ones that were each massive improvements for the same cost (this varied, of course, from hyperbole to massive understatement). We achieved this by shrinking transistors, so we could fit more onto the die. With that, we could dramatically increase clock speeds and the amount of RAM we could cram into a machine
But then we hit the wall of physics. Things haven't stopped improving since ~2015, but they've slowed down so, so much. We've made transistors so small that there's very little more improvement we can get by continuing down that path—they're already seeing serious quantum tunneling effects that need to be adjusted for.
We can no longer assume that we can just powerscale our way out of any computation-cost problem. And breakthroughs, by their very nature, cannot be relied upon—we have no guarantee that there's even a possible way to improve our silicon to scale the way we did before, let alone that it'll be something achievable this decade, or that it'll be cost-effective.
Re: Open source AI must win
#247Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I replied to a child comment - this is a nice idea that just isn't tenable in reality. AI hardware isn't just hilariously faster than consumer GPUs, it's also hilariously more power-efficient and has hilariously better connectivity. Every one of these dimensions kills the idea. The far, FAR superior power efficiency means that even if you did harness every public GPU or GPU-like device on earth, you'd end up consu…
AI hardware is for inference, not training. Training uses normal HPC crap. Superpods aren't really power efficient, it's kind of a meme, and it stems from limiting the power draw of other components by having less of them. It's more of a rounding error. > you'd end up consuming so much excess electricity it would be cheaper on net to simply take the money that would have gone to the power bill and spend it on your ow…
That makes no sense. It’s basically the same calculations for training as well.
Re: Open source AI must win
#248what if grok went open source and was on par with open chinese models? the business play may not be the models themselves but owning the data centers and running infrastructure for all models from all companies? a lot of people could then be rooting for xai and elon could ironically save face by actually implementing an open model
You can do that now. There are many different providers for Deepseek already.
Re: Open source AI must win
#249It can't.
Hear me out, economies of scale can only be met when there is a large enough liquidity for it.
The amount of people willing to purchase multiple hardware releases year after year just to run LLM is already tiny and businesses already do use their own hardware and there is no desire for manufacturer to reduce their own margins.
Re: Open source AI must win
#250[flagged]
Yeah perfect, the youth are already degenerates. Let’s put an always on demon in their room to be their life coach. I got off the libertarian train a long time ago, it’s as stupid as anarchists.