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

The LLama Effect: Leak Sparked a Series of Open Source Alternatives to ChatGPT

thesequence.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 527 posts

Re: The LLama Effect: Leak Sparked a Series of Open Source Alternatives to ChatGPT

#181

Post by mdp2021 »

firatsarlar wrote: post #123
mdp2021 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it seems perfectly capable of generalizing concepts How would you support that perception?

With hope and living? It is a dream come true for people. An abstract perception of a knowledge, is like sniffing a rose. It feels, yes, I get there. This 40.000 pages book, woow, I'll make time to live it or sniff another daisy?!

> It is a dream come true for people

For as long as they will be an active part of societies, they'll better live in reality. We need to know what we are dealing with factually, because water is not exchangeable with iron in practice.

The perception of a machine as being able «to generalize concepts» may be an illusion, so it requires some support: we want to avoid illusions for the contextual purposes.

Re: The LLama Effect: Leak Sparked a Series of Open Source Alternatives to ChatGPT

#182

Post by seydor »

whimsicalism wrote: post #11

It appears there is this genre of articles pretending that LLAMA or its RL-HF tuned variants are somehow even close to an alternative to ChatGPT. Spending more than a few moments interacting even with the larger instruct-tuned variants of these models quickly dispels that idea. Why do these takes around open-source AI remain so popular? What is the driving force?

> Why do these takes around open-source AI remain so popular? What is the driving force?

people like to tinker with things until they break and fix again. that's how we find their limits

People constantly try to break chatGPT too (i d wager they spend more time on that than real work). However talking to an opaque authoritarian chatbot, no matter how smart, gets boring after a while

Re: The LLama Effect: Leak Sparked a Series of Open Source Alternatives to ChatGPT

#183

Post by amrb »

RhodesianHunter wrote: post #144
amrb wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Devil's Advocate: The EU comes down hard on any AI company that doesn't work with researchers and institutions in future.

Outright banning due to fear seems far more likely.

I mean it's a good power tool, cuts fast with little effort.

But what's it gonna do in the hands of your parents or kids.. when it gets thing wrong, its could have way worst impact if it's intergrated in government, health care, finance etc..

Re: The LLama Effect: Leak Sparked a Series of Open Source Alternatives to ChatGPT

#184

Post by seydor »

jhbadger wrote: post #37
anonzzzies wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is vastly better than anything else so far though. The rest will catch up but openai is not sleeping and they are well funded.

I thought that was the case before trying Vicuna. I agree that LLaMA and Alpaca are inferior to ChatGPT but I'm really not sure Vicuna is. It even (unfortunately) copies some of ChatGPT's quirks, like getting prudish when asking it to write a love scene ("It would not be appropriate for me to write...")

is gpt4Xalpaca better?

Re: The LLama Effect: Leak Sparked a Series of Open Source Alternatives to ChatGPT

#185

Post by amrb »

jonplackett wrote: post #162
superkuh wrote: post #118

I've spent an embarassing amount of time since the llamas leaked playing with them, the tools to run them, and writing wrappers for them. They are technically alternatives in the sense that they're incomparably better chat bots than anything in the past. But at least for the 30B and under versions (65B is too big for me to run), no matter what fine tuning is done (alpaca, gpt4all, vicuna, etc), the llamas themselves…

The difference between 3.5 and 4 is gigantic even in my fairly limited experience. I gave them both some common sense tests and this one stuck out to me. Q: A glass door has ‘push’ written on it in mirror writing. Should you push or pull it GPT-3.5: If the word "push" is written in mirror writing on a glass door, you should push the door to open it GPT-4: Since the word "push" is written in mirror writing, it suggest…

Would like to see a yearly benchmark's for models like this!

Re: The LLama Effect: Leak Sparked a Series of Open Source Alternatives to ChatGPT

#186

Post by two_in_one »

jonplackett wrote: post #162
superkuh wrote: post #118

I've spent an embarassing amount of time since the llamas leaked playing with them, the tools to run them, and writing wrappers for them. They are technically alternatives in the sense that they're incomparably better chat bots than anything in the past. But at least for the 30B and under versions (65B is too big for me to run), no matter what fine tuning is done (alpaca, gpt4all, vicuna, etc), the llamas themselves…

The difference between 3.5 and 4 is gigantic even in my fairly limited experience. I gave them both some common sense tests and this one stuck out to me. Q: A glass door has ‘push’ written on it in mirror writing. Should you push or pull it GPT-3.5: If the word "push" is written in mirror writing on a glass door, you should push the door to open it GPT-4: Since the word "push" is written in mirror writing, it suggest…

[dead]

Re: The LLama Effect: Leak Sparked a Series of Open Source Alternatives to ChatGPT

#187

Post by amrb »

danShumway wrote: post #179
seydor wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (just a hobby, won't be big and professional like gnu) Llamas are creating the linux of AI and the ecosystem around it. Even though openAI has a head start, this whole thing is just starting. Llammas are showing the world that it doesn't take monopoly-level hardware to run those things. And because it's fun , like, video-game-fun there is going to be a lot of attention on them. Running a fully-owned, uncensored cha…

This is my hope as well. It would be disastrous if the future of AI is one where only megacorps can run it and where they control all access to it. In that sense, LLaMA is really encouraging and I'm seriously rooting for it to improve. It's just not there yet. I tend to be kind of bearish on LLMs in general, I think there's a lot more hype than is warranted, and people are overlooking some pretty significant downside…

LoRa has been pretty popular and untill the llama leak was not aware of it, maybe will see something cool out of the open assistant project, we have a lot of English and Spanish prompts and was crazy to see people doing an massive open source project for ML.

Re: The LLama Effect: Leak Sparked a Series of Open Source Alternatives to ChatGPT

#188

Post by inciampati »

seydor wrote: post #166
superkuh wrote: post #118

I've spent an embarassing amount of time since the llamas leaked playing with them, the tools to run them, and writing wrappers for them. They are technically alternatives in the sense that they're incomparably better chat bots than anything in the past. But at least for the 30B and under versions (65B is too big for me to run), no matter what fine tuning is done (alpaca, gpt4all, vicuna, etc), the llamas themselves…

> (just a hobby, won't be big and professional like gnu) Llamas are creating the linux of AI and the ecosystem around it. Even though openAI has a head start, this whole thing is just starting. Llammas are showing the world that it doesn't take monopoly-level hardware to run those things. And because it's fun , like, video-game-fun there is going to be a lot of attention on them. Running a fully-owned, uncensored cha…

They can be modified to produce qualities of output that are unique. This puts them back in the realm of individual control. I will put the human in the artificial in a way that is not true with the industrial models.

Re: The LLama Effect: Leak Sparked a Series of Open Source Alternatives to ChatGPT

#189

Post by syntheweave »

danShumway wrote: post #179
seydor wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (just a hobby, won't be big and professional like gnu) Llamas are creating the linux of AI and the ecosystem around it. Even though openAI has a head start, this whole thing is just starting. Llammas are showing the world that it doesn't take monopoly-level hardware to run those things. And because it's fun , like, video-game-fun there is going to be a lot of attention on them. Running a fully-owned, uncensored cha…

This is my hope as well. It would be disastrous if the future of AI is one where only megacorps can run it and where they control all access to it. In that sense, LLaMA is really encouraging and I'm seriously rooting for it to improve. It's just not there yet. I tend to be kind of bearish on LLMs in general, I think there's a lot more hype than is warranted, and people are overlooking some pretty significant downside…

I think there's a case to be made for the bottom of the market being the important part.

The aspects of LLMs that resemble AGI are pretty exciting, but there's a huge playspace for using the model just as an interface, a slightly smarter one that will understand the specific computing tasks you're looking for and connect them up with the appropriate syntax without requiring direct encoding.

A lot of what software projects come down to is in the syntax, and a conversational interface that can go a little bit beyond imperative command and a basic search box creates possibilities for new types of development environments.

Re: The LLama Effect: Leak Sparked a Series of Open Source Alternatives to ChatGPT

#190

Post by PoignardAzur »

jonplackett wrote: post #162
superkuh wrote: post #118

I've spent an embarassing amount of time since the llamas leaked playing with them, the tools to run them, and writing wrappers for them. They are technically alternatives in the sense that they're incomparably better chat bots than anything in the past. But at least for the 30B and under versions (65B is too big for me to run), no matter what fine tuning is done (alpaca, gpt4all, vicuna, etc), the llamas themselves…

The difference between 3.5 and 4 is gigantic even in my fairly limited experience. I gave them both some common sense tests and this one stuck out to me. Q: A glass door has ‘push’ written on it in mirror writing. Should you push or pull it GPT-3.5: If the word "push" is written in mirror writing on a glass door, you should push the door to open it GPT-4: Since the word "push" is written in mirror writing, it suggest…

Wait, how does GPT-4 even...

Does it benefit from its visual attention, or is it a case of "the question wasn't in GPT-3's training set but it was in GPT-4's"?

Post reply on HN