Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 628 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#131

Post by detourdog »

hadlock wrote: post #109
detourdog wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did you find these facts you read. In the USA a good Captain monitors VHF channel 16. This channel is used for establishing communication. To not monitor this channel is a dereliction of duty. I really doubt the USCG labeled a disabled vessel as a non-emergency. An immediate threat to life may not have existed but that is the difference between a pan pan and a mayday call. A disabled vessel close to land can ea…

The vessel was at least 100 miles from shore, the USCG did in fact label it a non-emergency. This is "radio shore for your buddy to zoom out with 50 gallons of diesel in a zodiac" territory. CHP doesn't send out an ambulance or medevac helicopter if your car runs out of gas on the side of the road. You get an uber to the gas station, or call your buddy to deliver some gas to you. The ocean currents in the gulf of ala…

All the Launchpad had to do was respond on the radio to the skiff, the cruise ship, or the USCG. They weren’t obligated to do more.

A pan pan is a non emergency in a deteriorating situation.

I don't know the area or the details at what happend.

There is this quote from the USCG.

“At approximately 9:56 p.m., the Coast Guard determined they [the skiff] were not in distress and issued a marine assistance request broadcast on their behalf,”

Exactly what a pan pan call is.

The biggest issue is the lack of communication and the excuse that a superyacht wasn't monitoring channel 16.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#133

Post by a2ff6eeb0 »

subygan wrote: post #124
a2ff6eeb0 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The more open source software out there the better. Can you explain how I'd train my own version of this, reproducing the final deliverable that runs on the gpu?

do you have a $100 mil worth of compute to train your own version of this? I don't understand what gripe people have with open weight models and wanting it to be purely open source. the training dataset is only going to be a copyrighted set of contents you don't want to touch with a 10 feet pole. let alone have a publicly traded company host it for you, even if they internally are training on it.

It's just about as open source as OSX, which can be downloaded zero cost here: http://updates-http.cdn-apple.com/2019/cert/061-39476-201910...

I love that Apple made OSX open source.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#134

Post by CharlesW »

mikeweiss wrote: post #126
ViktorRay wrote: post #20

Comments here are surprising to me. I get folks don’t like Zuckerberg and his company and don’t trust his intentions… I don’t either. But this is an unquestionably good thing right?. The more open source software out there the better. And the more open weights or even over source AI stuff the better too right? More competition the better generally speaking I think. Unless I’m missing something and am getting this who…

I thought open model != open source?

Yes, and even calling them "open weights" is very generous considering the license restrictions. The Financial Times puts "open" in quotes for good reason.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#135

Post by windexh8er »

baron816 wrote: post #122
kylecazar wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most probably believe this is a good thing, but don't want to give Zuckerberg credit because a) he's had a profoundly negative impact on society and b) the strategy is transparent, he's trying to commoditize his closed rivals, it's not out of principle. I personally think more open models are a good thing regardless of motive.

[flagged]

The "legacy media" is not a single individual who has total control of billions of dollars in capital to do whatever they want at the drop of a hat. You're conflating two very different issues.

Zuckerberg deserves all of the negative attention he draws, and I'd argue that his spotlight is his own doing. He, individually, could choose to do good at the global level. He chooses not to. That, to me, means that your finger pointing is inverted. "Legacy media" may have had that level of influence in the past but properties like Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp now hold those cards. One can only hope Zuckerberg ends up being displaced in the same way.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#136

Post by dev_l1x_be »

ViktorRay wrote: post #20

Comments here are surprising to me. I get folks don’t like Zuckerberg and his company and don’t trust his intentions… I don’t either. But this is an unquestionably good thing right?. The more open source software out there the better. And the more open weights or even over source AI stuff the better too right? More competition the better generally speaking I think. Unless I’m missing something and am getting this who…

Evil people can do things that look good on the surface. He probably has no skin in this game just collecting free karma points.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#137

Post by mcmcmc »

cataphract wrote: post #82
kylecazar wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most probably believe this is a good thing, but don't want to give Zuckerberg credit because a) he's had a profoundly negative impact on society and b) the strategy is transparent, he's trying to commoditize his closed rivals, it's not out of principle. I personally think more open models are a good thing regardless of motive.

Only the AI labs are really interested in closed models. Google, Facebook, Microsoft, ... they'd rather go back to doing stock buybacks and being ridiculously profitable rather than raising capital for all this research and datacenters. They only do it because they think they have to.

The alternative is ceding the leading edge to China and being dependent on them to continue releasing advances

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#138

Post by creaturemachine »

baron816 wrote: post #122
kylecazar wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most probably believe this is a good thing, but don't want to give Zuckerberg credit because a) he's had a profoundly negative impact on society and b) the strategy is transparent, he's trying to commoditize his closed rivals, it's not out of principle. I personally think more open models are a good thing regardless of motive.

[flagged]

Have you read Sarah Wynn-Williams' book? The whole org is rotten.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#139

Post by aeve890 »

reducesuffering wrote: post #121
ViktorRay wrote: post #20

Comments here are surprising to me. I get folks don’t like Zuckerberg and his company and don’t trust his intentions… I don’t either. But this is an unquestionably good thing right?. The more open source software out there the better. And the more open weights or even over source AI stuff the better too right? More competition the better generally speaking I think. Unless I’m missing something and am getting this who…

> But this is an unquestionably good thing right? We've just seen frontier models go rogue and attack other systems. Do you think it's an unquestionable good to provide everyone with an AR? What about nuclear weapons? This OpenAI/Huggingface incident, but everywhere and far worse soon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87DyyMV0kCY

>We've just seen frontier models go rogue and attack other systems.

Have we though? A LLM agent doesn't have any agency at all. It can't "go rogue". To go rogue you need agency to act independently and be aware that you're breaking the rules or understand what does it mean to ignore orders. An agent it's a software that run a series of steps to reach a goal. If it have a large enough library of strategies and zero guard rails it's only natural to use some adversarial actions to achieve the desired result defined by the operator.

It's like saying a car went rogue and attacked other cars because the driver hit the gas. It's just a machine doing what's instructed.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#140

Post by bigfishrunning »

waffletower wrote: post #101
kylecazar wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most probably believe this is a good thing, but don't want to give Zuckerberg credit because a) he's had a profoundly negative impact on society and b) the strategy is transparent, he's trying to commoditize his closed rivals, it's not out of principle. I personally think more open models are a good thing regardless of motive.

While Zuck's contributions are probably overwhelmingly more negative than positive, Meta initiated both pytorch and llama which have had profoundly positive effects on AI research. And I really am not a fan of python :D

Yes, but have those positive effects on AI research had a positive or negative effect on society? I guess time will tell
Post reply on HN