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

211–220 of 282 posts

Re: Mistral Large

#211

Post by satellite2 »

tmpz22 wrote: post #186
observationist wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You shouldn't have had any trust to begin with; I don't know why we are so quick to hold up humans as bastions of truth and integrity. This is stereotypical Gell-Mann amnesia - you have to validate information, for yourself, within your own model of the world. You need the tools to be able to verify information that's important to you, whether it's research or knowing which experts or sources are likely to be trustwo…

> This is stereotypical Gell-Mann amnesia - you have to validate information, for yourself, within your own model of the world. You need the tools to be able to verify information that's important to you, whether it's research or knowing which experts or sources are likely to be trustworthy. Except anthropologically speaking we still live in trust-based society. We trust water to be available. We trust the grocery st…

And most importantly we trust money to not only be paper or bits

Re: Mistral Large

#212

Post by fragmede »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #205
nulld3v wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> OpenAI could open GPT 4 tomorrow and it wouldn’t meaningfully impact their revenue. I find this very difficult to believe, GPT-4 is still the best public model. If they hand out the weights other companies will immediately release APIs for it, cannibalizing OpenAI's API sales.

That’s the theory. In practice, it requires immense infrastructure to run it, let alone all the tooling and sales pipelines surrounding it. Companies are risk averse by definition, and in practice the risks are usually different than the ones you imagine from first principles. It’s dumb. The first company to prove this will hopefully set an example that will be noticed.

Ollama makes it pretty easy to run inference on a bunch of model-available releases. If a company is after code/text generation, finding a company/contractor to fine tune one of the model-available releases on their source code, and have IT deploy Ollama to ask their employees with M3 MacBooks, decked out with 64 GiB of RAM is well within the abilities of a competent and well funded IT department.

What recognition has Facebook gotten for their model releases? How has that been priced into their stock price?

Re: Mistral Large

#213

Post by riku_iki »

yogorenapan wrote: post #155
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…

Any training on internet data beyond 2022 is gonna lead to this. ChatGPT output is sprawled everywhere on the internet.

it just means that data is poorly curated, annotated and prioritized, e.g. they could add some stronger seed of core knowledge about what Mistral is.

Re: Mistral Large

#214

Post by MyFirstSass »

ipsum2 wrote: post #209
irthomasthomas wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Per you link, they also removed these quotes: In your hands Our products comes with transparent access to our weights, permitting full customisation. We don't want your data! Committing to open models. We believe in open science, community and free software. We release many of our models and deployment tools under permissive licenses. We benefit from the OSS community, and give back. Edit: this is pretty fucking sad,…

Exactly who is a monopoly? There are 4-5 separate companies with models as good as mistral.

There really isn't though? I've not seen anything close to Mistral yet in the 7b space - and it's even going downhill, Gemma is a total joke surprisingly, almost non functional.

Re: Mistral Large

#215

Post by kkarakk »

llamaimperative wrote: post #173
pseudosavant wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be clear, information on the internet has always been assumed unreliable. It isn't like you typically click on only the very first Google link because 1) Google is that good (they aren't) 2) the data is reliable without corroboration.

This is a matter of signal-noise. What people are saying when they complain about this is that the cost of producing noise that looks like signal has gone down dramatically.

depends on what your personal filters are - i've always felt like a large amount of the things i see on the internet are clearly shaped in some artificial way.

either by a "raid" by some organized group seeking to shape discourse or just accidentally by someone creating the right conditions via entertainment. With enough digging into names/phrases you can backtrack to the source.

LLMs trained on these sources are gonna have the same biases inherently. This is before considering the idea that the people training these things could just obfuscate a particularly biased node and claim innocence.

Re: Mistral Large

#216

Post by fifteen1506 »

LLM summary of comments:

> 1. Mistral AI, previously known for open-weight models, announced two new non-open source models.

> 2. The change in direction has led to criticism from some users, who argue that it goes against the company's original commitment to open science and community.

> 3. A few users have expressed concerns about the potential negative impact on technological progress and competition.

> 4. Some users argue that there are other companies offering similar models, while others disagree.

> 5. There is a debate about the potential impact of releasing model weights on a company's revenue.

> 6. The discussion also touches on the broader topic of the role of open source in the tech industry and the balance between innovation and profit.

Re: Mistral Large

#217

Post by fragmede »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #207
chadash wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won’t eat at that restaurant anymore because the chef no longer publishes cookbooks. Oh, you say he will tell me the recipe as long as I agree not to use it to open a restaurant across the street? Well, f** him that’s not good enough. He built his career learning recipes from cookbooks who learned recipes from other cookbooks. He owes it to me to publish his recipes and let me do what I want with them.

The chef made his entire reputation by publishing cookbooks, and practically overnight pivoted from loudly proclaiming how important it was to share recipes to refusing to share anything and telling people to just eat at his restaurant.

Where this analogy falls flat, is the fact that I can take the "food", the model, and copy it an infinite amount of times, and use it to open my own, competing restaurant, who's food is as delicious as the original chef's. It'll differ some in presentation, but it's still gonna be a really really good cut of high end steak that was heated just right and melts in your mouth in all the right ways, without me having to put in any of the work it took to get there, which means my overhead is way lower. Suddenly, this chef has to compete with my fast food knock-off of their Michelin star restaurant. Some people like paying $400 for a meal for the experience, but it turns out more people just wanna be fed and are cheap, and can't or don't want to pay for the Michelin dining experience when the food is of equal quality in this tortured analogy. No one goes to the original chef's restaurant, and they go out of business.

The original chef probably shouldn't have told everyone their recipes were always gonna be available to the world for free in the first place, but we were all young and dumb and idealistic and didn't think things through at some point in our lives.

Re: Mistral Large

#218

Post by MyFirstSass »

machdiamonds wrote: post #191
newswasboring wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I think people are disappointed that some of the huge amounts of tax they pay don't go towards keeping some of this world changing tech open.

OpenAI became closed, same with Mistral - why don't EU, Mozilla, or whatever org make it so some of this tech remains in the open? We can apparently send trillions towards war and the all encompassing corruption surrounding that but are never agile in any other context where money is not getting siphoned off to some complex, i wonder why.

Re: Mistral Large

#219

Post by viraptor »

fragmede wrote: post #212
sillysaurusx wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s the theory. In practice, it requires immense infrastructure to run it, let alone all the tooling and sales pipelines surrounding it. Companies are risk averse by definition, and in practice the risks are usually different than the ones you imagine from first principles. It’s dumb. The first company to prove this will hopefully set an example that will be noticed.

Ollama makes it pretty easy to run inference on a bunch of model-available releases. If a company is after code/text generation, finding a company/contractor to fine tune one of the model-available releases on their source code, and have IT deploy Ollama to ask their employees with M3 MacBooks, decked out with 64 GiB of RAM is well within the abilities of a competent and well funded IT department. What recognition ha…

That's completely different scale. You're not going to run GPT4 like a random ollama model. At that point you need dedicated external hardware for the service, and proper batching/pipelining to utilise it well. This is way out of the "enough ram in the laptop area".

Re: Mistral Large

#220

Post by fragmede »

newswasboring wrote: post #204
shuckles wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If "enshittification" includes "companies improving products but not making improvements available for free use by others", then it's a meaningless term.

Enshittification means companies breaking the social contract they started with, and in some cases like openAI completely reverse it. You can't have "Open Weights models" as your tag line and just proceed to become exactly not that. That is enshittification by any standards.

It's more about companies going from offering good value to their users, to extracting value from their userbase, and the changes to the produy along the way, as Cory Doctorow coined it.

Put that way, is Mistrial changiy directions not releasing future models that? I don't disagree that this move sucks, but it's not like they just changed a secret setting so their model you're currently running on your computer is now secretly uploading your incognito browsing habits to their servers. They changed what they're going to sell/release, going forwards, but that's it. No users got abused here, from my POV, but maybe I'm not seeing it.

Post reply on HN