Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where did you find these facts you read. In the USA a good Captain monitors VHF channel 16. This channel is used for establishing communication. To not monitor this channel is a dereliction of duty. I really doubt the USCG labeled a disabled vessel as a non-emergency. An immediate threat to life may not have existed but that is the difference between a pan pan and a mayday call. A disabled vessel close to land can ea…
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/10/zuckerberg-y... https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/article316824631.h... I haven't found any source that states what channel the request for assistance came in on. But multiple sources are reporting that the coast guard determined they were not in distress.
Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models
281–290 of 631 posts
Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models
#282Earlier quoted context omitted.
The model release is nice. I won't sing their praises for it because that plays into the long term strategy of a company I despise. Is that intellectually dishonest?
It depends on if you can say things like "it is good they are supporting this" or "I'm glad they're doing this" or "good for them" without having to couch it in a bunch of stuff about how terrible they are.
> It depends on if you can say things like "it is good they are supporting this" or "I'm glad they're doing this" or "good for them" without having to couch it in a bunch of stuff about how terrible they are.
That is a weird definition of intellectual honesty. If you hold both of those opinions, what's wrong with stating them both?
If the answer has to do with the rhetorical effect, that seems a lot harder to justify as intellectual dishonesty, but I don't want to put words in your mouth.
Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models
#283Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The more open source software out there the better. Can you explain how I'd train my own version of this, reproducing the final deliverable that runs on the gpu?
do you have a $100 mil worth of compute to train your own version of this? I don't understand what gripe people have with open weight models and wanting it to be purely open source. the training dataset is only going to be a copyrighted set of contents you don't want to touch with a 10 feet pole. let alone have a publicly traded company host it for you, even if they internally are training on it.
You don't get why people would like to be in control of a powerful new technology before they build their stuff arround it ?
Sure, there might be currently contraints, but I think it is quite possible training will get optimized over time or crowsourced training can be organized.
Without fully end-to-end open source models you are still at the mercy of the model provider to keep providing updates, you have no idea what garbage they trained the model on & can't fix that, not to mention might end up getting sued for using the open weigth model once all those "AI stole my data" lawsuits are finally decided.
Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models
#284I think something that doesn't get said enough is Meta did, albeit intentionally kick off the origin of the open source race back in 2023 with the release of llama. I'm not a big fan of meta in general, but they've done enough good, and it's possible that it was intentional as well. I don't know, I wasn't in the rooms, and I think it's worth giving them some reasonable doubt. No one is purely good, and no one is pure…
>> No one is purely good, and no one is purely evil. I will make an exception for Musk and DODGE
A billionaire (now trilionaire) helping lead and celebrate an extraordinarily rapid dismantling process in which vulnerable children lost life preserving assistance...
Essential employees were fired before the government had even established that it could safely do without them, and then...
After brandishing the chainsaw of efficiency in public, in the most cowardly way, went and then invoked all legal protections from being deposed on DODGE actions, personally and not answering under oath about the key decisions in that dismantling.
Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models
#285I think something that doesn't get said enough is Meta did, albeit intentionally kick off the origin of the open source race back in 2023 with the release of llama. I'm not a big fan of meta in general, but they've done enough good, and it's possible that it was intentional as well. I don't know, I wasn't in the rooms, and I think it's worth giving them some reasonable doubt. No one is purely good, and no one is pure…
???
[deleted]
Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models
#286If you believe, as an increasing number of folks do, that LLMs are basically commoditized at this point or will be soon then there really isn’t a path forward for non open models. There simply isn’t any value in the models and only in the compute to run them and potentially some higher-order coordination layers. That’s very bad for the big model labs that banked their future on the opposite, but there just doesn’t se…
I strongly prefer a world where open models "win," that said...
I don't understand how we will sustain an ecosystem of open models like the one that exists today. My thoughts go down this path every time I try to put the pieces together:
- Many open models depend on high quality frontier models as a distillation input
- US closed frontier models drive China's open model strategy despite the business model for open models being somewhat fuzzy
- What is the business model that benefits from open weights, exactly? How do their vendors recoup infrastructure and training costs?
I would be grateful to be enlightened on this topic.
Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models
#287Earlier quoted context omitted.
You clearly have an opinion you want to share, otherwise you wouldn't have written anything. Instead of just outright saying what you think, you are being vague. Why? It's true that Meta laid off a lot of people, and blamed refocusing on AI as the reason, but I still don't see how that somehow contradicts GP's quote above.
one time about 9 years ago I was in the comments of a stackoverflow question, and saying something like "an accessor function need not directly give the underlying structure of the data it's accessing, for example, just because in common lisp, (car nil) is nil and (cdr nil) is also nil, does not mean that nil is implemented as (cons nil nil). The person I was responding to (who I recall was disagreeing with me on the…
We really don’t celebrate enough how much AI has saved us from terrible SO interactions. Not being entirely serious here, because the site had its good parts, but arguing in threads or having your questions randomly eviscerated or threads closed was a hard way to learn programming.
Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models
#288Earlier quoted context omitted.
Words mean what people use them to mean. Ship has sailed whether you approve or not.
Yup. An extremist wing of the FOSS movement ceded the debate early on by trying to insist open source required full access to the training data. Philosophically, not wrong. But practically fucked, so the word evolved. Within tech circles, open weight != open source. Outside them, they’re synonyms.
Training data without the training regime is useless. A cake is not open source because they list the ingredients.
Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models
#289Comments here are surprising to me. I get folks don’t like Zuckerberg and his company and don’t trust his intentions… I don’t either. But this is an unquestionably good thing right?. The more open source software out there the better. And the more open weights or even over source AI stuff the better too right? More competition the better generally speaking I think. Unless I’m missing something and am getting this who…
This is not open source; you mean open weight. These models are the antithesis of FOSS. Is it better than hosted models from other big labs? Yes, but not by much from a freedom perspective. especially considering the texts these were trained on. Grumble grumble, these details matter.
Genuine question, but why does it matter? It seems to me the vast majority of the benefit comes in the weights. Then you can self host, quantize, finetune, ablate, etc. What does having the original data get you beyond that?
Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models
#290My favorite paragraph from Zuckerberg's writeup: """ [...] it is surprising that the discourse from many developing AI is so filled with doom. I do not understand why anyone who believes that AI will eliminate most jobs and much of humanity's relevance would rush to build that future. The notion that AI is so dangerous that the only safe path is an extreme concentration of power seems inherently problematic. Historic…
i’ll take a stab: the enormously rich people rushing to build AI and replace everyone’s job will get richer, while everyone else suffers. that’s why.
Right, yeah.. That's the subtext right?