Mistral Large
21–30 of 282 posts
Re: Mistral Large
#22The old API endpoints seem to still work? I just got a response from "mistral-medium" but in the updated docs it looks like that's switched to "mistral-medium-latest" Anyone know if that'll get phased out?
Re: Mistral Large
#23Looks 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.
I've been saying this for months but every time I get down voted for saying it. It annoys me that people fall for these marketing tactics and keep promoting and advertising the product for free. It's not just the models though- even tools that started off as open source ended up aiming for VC and stopped being totally open. Examples: LlamaIndex, Langchain, and most likely Ollama.
Isn’t the ollama service already closed source?
I’m pretty sure you can’t use it without connecting to the private model binary server.
It’s a very small step to a paid docker hub, cough sorry, ollama hub.
Re: Mistral Large
#24Looks 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.
I've been saying this for months but every time I get down voted for saying it. It annoys me that people fall for these marketing tactics and keep promoting and advertising the product for free. It's not just the models though- even tools that started off as open source ended up aiming for VC and stopped being totally open. Examples: LlamaIndex, Langchain, and most likely Ollama.
Haven't been following closely, what's the issue with langchain?
Re: Mistral Large
#25The old API endpoints seem to still work? I just got a response from "mistral-medium" but in the updated docs it looks like that's switched to "mistral-medium-latest" Anyone know if that'll get phased out?
The phrasing in the announcement is a bit awkward.
> We’re maintaining mistral-medium, which we are not updating today.
As a French speaker, I parse this to mean: "we're not releasing a new version of mistral-medium today, but there are no plans to deprecate it."
edit: but they renamed the endpoint.
Re: Mistral Large
#26So how long until we can do an open source Mistral Large?
We could make a start on Petals or some other open source distributed training network cluster possibly?
Re: Mistral Large
#27Looks 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.
I've been saying this for months but every time I get down voted for saying it. It annoys me that people fall for these marketing tactics and keep promoting and advertising the product for free. It's not just the models though- even tools that started off as open source ended up aiming for VC and stopped being totally open. Examples: LlamaIndex, Langchain, and most likely Ollama.
If you're genuinely getting value from the open-source versions, how is that "falling for" anything?
Re: Mistral Large
#28Looks 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 availability of the results, sadly.
I should add: Mistral, Meta, etc don't release open source models, all we get is the 'binary'.
Re: Mistral Large
#29[flagged]
Re: Mistral Large
#30There is not a lot of advantage to releasing this on Azure where you are directly competing with GPT-4, which will beat you on most tasks.
Once a LLM is "good enough" the metric people care about is cost/token, which is never going to be in GPT4's favor.
It might be in their favour, it might not be in their favour. OpenAI gets a lot of concentrated experience for which optimisations are good vs. which break stuff, just like Google did with the question of which signals are good or bad proxies for content users want to be presented with for any given search, which lasted, what, 25 years before Google became noticeably mediocre?
But also, "good enough" means different things to different people and for different tasks, all the way up to "good enough to replace all the cognitive labour humans do", and the usual assumptions about economics will probably break before we reach that point.