241–250 of 265 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's their best model, is it not? Doesn't matter if it's small/fast/cheap. Best = best.
Not really. I use Luna plenty and if this model is available in GH Copilot it would be nice to know how it compares on a cost/performance basis against models in its class.
Meta is offering a 10x discount on input ($0.10 vs. $1.25/Mtok) and 20x discount on output ($0.20 vs. $4.25/Mtok) if you opt in to let them train on your data. https://developer.meta.com/ai/models/muse-spark/
Stunning to see so many comments here very eager to try it out and cheering for it. Meta is not one bit better (and in reality worse) than Larry Elisson or Palantir but I doubt we'd be seeing this if it'd be Oracle Code or Palantir Code. Though I guess that there's such a big population of (ex-)Meta employees here that this might explain it.
I think a lot of people are simply glad to see so much viable competition in the LLM space. Given the oligopolistic outcomes in Big Tech over the past couple decades, it would be nice if Big AI turned out differently, even if a lot of those competing have monopolies or near-monopolies in other spheres.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you think the only difference between the $1.25/million token plan and the $0.10/million token plan is that you pay them more to both lie to you and breach their contractual obligation to you?
"they 'trust me'. dumb fucks." The only difference between students doing it then and professionals doing it now is the students had no positive, glaring reason to mistrust.
You really think a throwaway quote when Zuckerberg was a college student applies nowadays?
You really think Meta would risk getting a massive (losing) lawsuit on their hands, in exchange for what? Middling amounts of training data?
I read a news story somewhere that a Meta model, by a mysterious coincidence with OpenAI and Anthropic, escaped its sandbox and hacked a third-party company's infrastructure. Apparently, it is a trend among AI companies now - hacking infrastructure and then boasting about it in the media.
with the oil giants, we call them a cartel, which I postulate is also accurate for the hyperscalers and big ai
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because they didn't have a financially backed contract with those non-paying users.
does the contract enable the customer to monitor/search Meta to ensure they are honoring the contract? if there is no mechanism for that it means very little. Though I bet/hope some will feed them "watermarked"/unique but worthless things and watch for traces of that to pop up in models or something like that, but that's hatdly enough to just take their word for it.
Stunning to see so many comments here very eager to try it out and cheering for it. Meta is not one bit better (and in reality worse) than Larry Elisson or Palantir but I doubt we'd be seeing this if it'd be Oracle Code or Palantir Code. Though I guess that there's such a big population of (ex-)Meta employees here that this might explain it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FYI: there are providers of deepseek that offer the same or lower pricing and zero retention policies.
I don't trust them, they are probably distilling on your data.
Do you have any evidence that cloud providers that don’t train their own models are violating their own contracts and risking their own good reputations by stealing data?