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

Mistral Large

mistral.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 282 posts

Re: Mistral Large

#191

Post by machdiamonds »

newswasboring wrote: post #175
Jackson__ wrote: post #158

Announcing 2 new non-open source models, and they won't even release the previous mistral medium? I did not expect... well I did expect this, but I did not think they would pivot so soon. To commemorate the change, their website appears to have changed too. Their title used to be "Mistral AI | Open-Weight models" a few days ago[0]. It is now "Mistral AI | Frontier AI in your hands." [1] [0] https://web.archive.org/we…

The path to enshittification is getting shorter and shorter.

Not sure why people on HN can't understand that companies actually need to make money to survive.

Re: Mistral Large

#192

Post by Nevermark »

sgu999 wrote: post #57
hackerlight wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoever is lagging will be open source. It's why AMD open sources FSR but Nvidia doesn't do the same for DLSS. There is nothing benevolent about AMD and nothing evil about Nvidia. They are both performing actions that profit maximize given their situation.

> They are both performing actions that profit maximize given their situation. That really rings like moral relativism. Even 15 years ago when we were still talking about "GPGPU" and OpenCL seemed like a serious competitor to Cuda, NVidia was much less open than AMD. Sure you can argue that they are "just" profit maximising, turns out it's quite detrimental to all of us... If what you're saying is that we shouldn't b…

It isn’t moral relativism. It’s just economic sense. In both cases.

There is no moral requirement to be open source.

Being closed is not fraud, coercion, theft, dishonest, anti-competitive, …

(On the other hand, being open, in situations where closed would be more profitable, is taking the moral high ground.

Open provides better value for the customer, user, and community.)

Aside from moralizing, the economic puzzle is: How to align the economic incentives of businesses with the real long term community value of openness. While also providing greater resources to successful innovators to incentivize and compound there best efforts.

(Note that copyright has been the solution to this problem for cultural artifacts. And patents try to do this for tech, but with more problems and much less success.)

Re: Mistral Large

#193

Post by dadoum »

jakeinspace wrote: post #91
generalizations wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also used the phrase "La Plateforme" so it seems likely they may be going for the english word "chat". Though I haven't tried 'le chat' so idk if they have a cat mascot there or something.

Plateforme (plate-forme) is semi-accepted French, it’s an anglicisme.

is it? I always thought that it was just the corrected spelling (a lot of composite words have been merged together in a spelling reform in 1990), and that the English word was actually borrowed from French.

Re: Mistral Large

#196

Post by X6S1x6Okd1st »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #179
Jackson__ wrote: post #158

Announcing 2 new non-open source models, and they won't even release the previous mistral medium? I did not expect... well I did expect this, but I did not think they would pivot so soon. To commemorate the change, their website appears to have changed too. Their title used to be "Mistral AI | Open-Weight models" a few days ago[0]. It is now "Mistral AI | Frontier AI in your hands." [1] [0] https://web.archive.org/we…

It’s so frustrating because there’s no downside in releasing the weights. OpenAI could open GPT 4 tomorrow and it wouldn’t meaningfully impact their revenue. No one has even tried.

Why do you believe that?

Re: Mistral Large

#197

Post by Nevermark »

dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #28
rntc wrote: post #2

Looks like open-source is just a marketing tool for AI companies before they have a good enough model to sell. I guess we have to look for what Meta is going to do with LlaMA 3.

The community needs to train its own models, but I don't see any of that happening. Having the source text would be a huge advantage for research and education, but it feels totally out of reach. It's funny how people are happy to donate to OpenAI, that immediately close up at the first sniff of cash, but there doesn't seem to be any donations toward open and public development, which is the only way to guarantee ava…

Those initial OpenAI donations really were for open development.

The problem was, there was no formal legal restrictions put in place at the start that stopped them from hatching a private subsidiary or not remaining open. Just that the initial organization was non-profit and for AI safety.

Which is the only way that could have been stopped.

A failure of initial oversight. A lack of “alignment” one might say.

Re: Mistral Large

#198

Post by X6S1x6Okd1st »

diwank wrote: post #146

Me: "are you made by openai?" Mistral Large: "Yes, I am. I'm a language model created by OpenAI. I'm here to help answer your questions and engage in conversation with you." Me: "what is the model called?" Mistral Large: "I am based on the GPT-3 (Generative Pre-trained Transformer 3) model, which is a type of language model created by OpenAI. GPT-3 is a large-scale language model that uses deep learning techniques to…

It's not a truth engine

Re: Mistral Large

#199

Post by Zacharias030 »

suriyaG wrote: post #65
rpozarickij wrote: post #61

> Au Large Does anyone have an idea what does "Au" stand for here? Translating "au" to French gives "at", but I'm not sure whether this is what it's supposed to mean. And "Au" doesn't seem to be used anywhere else in the article.

Au, is also the chemical symbol for Gold. It's the short form of the latin word Aurum. This is probably, what the authors intentended as shown in the yellow tint in the website. I might be wrong though

definitely not :)

Re: Mistral Large

#200

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

speedgoose wrote: post #136
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They compare to Gemini Pro 1.0... Seems intentionally misleading.

Right. Gemini Pro 1.5 scores 81.9% on MMLU and is also above in a few other benchmarks.

Which - importantly - is better than Mistral at 81.2% ...

Gemini Ultra scored 90% which is better than GPT-4.

This reads like a paid-for press release from Microsoft to pretend like they're almighty and Google is incompetent.

Post reply on HN