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

DBRX: A new open LLM

databricks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 360 posts

Re: DBRX: A new open LLM

#151

Post by richardw »

hintymad wrote: post #121
ramoz wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their goal is to always drive enterprise business towards consumption. With AI they need to desperately steer the narrative away from API based services (OpenAI). By training LLMs, they build sales artifacts (stories, references, even accelerators with LLMs themselves) to paint the pictures needed to convince their enterprise customer market that Databricks is the platform for enterprise AI. Their blog details how th…

Thanks! Why do they not focus on hosting other open models then? I suspect other models will soon catch up with their advantages in faster inference and better benchmark results. That said, maybe the advantage is aligned interests: they want customers to use their platforms, so they can keep their models open. In contrast, Mistral removed their commitment to open source as they found a potential path to profitability…

They do have a solid focus on doing so, it’s just not exclusive.

https://www.databricks.com/product/machine-learning/large-la...

Re: DBRX: A new open LLM

#152

Post by hn_acker »

hn_acker wrote: post #31

Even though the README.md calls the license the Databricks Open Source License, the LICENSE file includes paragraphs such as > You will not use DBRX or DBRX Derivatives or any Output to improve any other large language model (excluding DBRX or DBRX Derivatives). and > If, on the DBRX version release date, the monthly active users of the products or services made available by or for Licensee, or Licensee’s affiliates,…

Sorry, I forgot to link the repository [1] and missed the edit window by the time I realized.

The bottom of the README.md [2] contains the following license grant with the misleading "Open Source" term:

> License

> Our model weights and code are licensed for both researchers and commercial entities. The Databricks Open Source License can be found at LICENSE, and our Acceptable Use Policy can be found here.

[1] https://github.com/databricks/dbrx

[2] https://github.com/databricks/dbrx/blob/main/README.md

Re: DBRX: A new open LLM

#153

Post by mrtranscendence »

melondonkey wrote: post #105
gigatexal wrote: post #72

data engineer here, offtopic, but am i the only guy tired of databricks shilling their tools as the end-all, be-all solutions for all things data engineering?

Data scientist here that’s also tired of the tools. We put so much effort in trying to educate DSes in our company to get away from notebooks and use IDEs like VS or RStudio and databricks has been a step backwards cause we didn’t get the integrated version

I'm a data scientist and I agree that work meant to last should be in a source-controlled project coded via a text editor or IDE. But sometimes it's extremely useful to get -- and iterate on -- immediate results. There's no good way to do that without either notebooks or at least a REPL.

Re: DBRX: A new open LLM

#154

Post by pandastronaut »

melondonkey wrote: post #105
gigatexal wrote: post #72

data engineer here, offtopic, but am i the only guy tired of databricks shilling their tools as the end-all, be-all solutions for all things data engineering?

Data scientist here that’s also tired of the tools. We put so much effort in trying to educate DSes in our company to get away from notebooks and use IDEs like VS or RStudio and databricks has been a step backwards cause we didn’t get the integrated version

Thank you ! I am so tired of all those unmaintainable nor debugable notebooks. Years ago, Databricks had a specific page on their documentation where they stated that notebooks where not for production grade software. It has been removed. And now you have a chatgpt like in their notebooks ... What a step backwards. How can all those developers be so happy without having the bare minimum tools to diagnosis their code ? And I am not even talking about unit testing here.

Re: DBRX: A new open LLM

#155

Post by IshanMi »

shnkr wrote: post #3

GenAI novice here. what is training data made of how is it collected? I guess no one will share details on it, otherwise a good technical blog post with lots of insights! >At Databricks, we believe that every enterprise should have the ability to control its data and its destiny in the emerging world of GenAI. >The main process of building DBRX - including pretraining, post-training, evaluation, red-teaming, and refi…

Personally, I found looking at open source work to be much more instructive in learning about AI and how things like training data and such are done from the ground up. I suspect this is because training data is one of the bigger moats an AI company can have, as well as all the class action lawsuits surrounding training data.

One of the best open source datasets that are freely available is The Pile by EleutherAI [1]. It's a few years old now (~2020), but they did some really diligent work in putting together the dataset and documenting it. A more recent and even larger dataset would be the Falcon-RefinedWeb dataset [2].

[1]: https://arxiv.org/abs/2101.00027 [2]: https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.01116

Re: DBRX: A new open LLM

#156

Post by mattsan »

mnemoni_c wrote: post #55
emmender2 wrote: post #46

this proves that all llm models converge to a certain point when trained on the same data. ie, there is really no differentiation between one model or the other. Claims about out-performance on tasks are just that, claims. the next iteration of llama or mixtral will converge. LLMs seem to evolve like linux/windows or ios/android with not much differentiation in the foundation models.

Yea it feels like transformer LLMs are in or getting closer to diminishing returns. Will need some new breakthrough, likely entirely new approach, to get to AGI levels

can't wait for LLMs to dispatch field agent robots who search for answers in the real world thats not online /s

Re: DBRX: A new open LLM

#157

Post by wantsanagent »

saeleor wrote: post #81

looks great, although I couldn't find anything on how "open" the license is/will be for commercial purposes wouldn't be the first branding as open source going the LLaMA route

It's another custom license. It will have to be reviewed by counsel at every company that's thinking about using it. Many will find the acceptable use policy to be vague, overly broad, and potentially damaging for the company.

Looking at the performance stats for this model, the risk of using any non-OSI licensed model over just using Mixtral or Mistral will (and IMO should be) too great for commercial purposes.

Re: DBRX: A new open LLM

#158

Post by BoorishBears »

hintymad wrote: post #99

Just curious, what business benefit will Databricks get by spending potentially millions of dollars on an open LLM?

Databricks is trying to go all-in on convincing organizations they need to use in-house models, and therefore pay they to provide LLMOps.

They're so far into this that their CTO co-authored a borderline dishonest study which got a ton of traction last summer trying to discredit GPT-4: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2307.09009.pdf

Re: DBRX: A new open LLM

#159

Post by cwyers »

hintymad wrote: post #121
ramoz wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their goal is to always drive enterprise business towards consumption. With AI they need to desperately steer the narrative away from API based services (OpenAI). By training LLMs, they build sales artifacts (stories, references, even accelerators with LLMs themselves) to paint the pictures needed to convince their enterprise customer market that Databricks is the platform for enterprise AI. Their blog details how th…

Thanks! Why do they not focus on hosting other open models then? I suspect other models will soon catch up with their advantages in faster inference and better benchmark results. That said, maybe the advantage is aligned interests: they want customers to use their platforms, so they can keep their models open. In contrast, Mistral removed their commitment to open source as they found a potential path to profitability…

Commoditize your complements:

https://gwern.net/complement

If Databricks makes their money off model serving and doesn't care whose model you use, they are incentivized to help the open models be competitive with the closed models they can't serve.

Re: DBRX: A new open LLM

#160

Post by jjgo »

briandw wrote: post #119

Worse than the chart crime of truncating the y axis is putting LLaMa2's Human Eval scores on there and not comparing it to Code Llama Instruct 70b. DBRX still beats Code Llama Instruct's 67.8 but not by that much.

> "On HumanEval, DBRX Instruct even surpasses CodeLLaMA-70B Instruct, a model built explicitly for programming, despite the fact that DBRX Instruct is designed for general-purpose use (70.1% vs. 67.8% on HumanEval as reported by Meta in the CodeLLaMA blog)."

To be fair, they do compare to it in the main body of the blog. It's just probably misleading to compare to CodeLLaMA on non coding benchmarks.

Post reply on HN