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

Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 631 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#291

Post by amarcheschi »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #280
tehlike wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think they continued to do it? Ps: I work for meta, but not in AI related orgs.

It’s obvious? They still hate us and hope we die… at least every movement they make seems like that. I kid. I’m all for meta releasing more open weight models. I mean… I’m also 1000% certain that China is going to undercut whatever they can do if even not a technology reason but a legal reason. I’ve seen some wild stuff posted that has been made with Minimax… things a US company could never allow to happen.

>wild stuff posted that has been made with Minimax… things a US company could never allow to happen.

Such as?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#292

Post by ben_w »

s0ss wrote: post #277
semiquaver wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Words mean what people use them to mean. Ship has sailed whether you approve or not.

You can choose to use the wrong words all you want. Doing so intentionally is an interesting choice.

Communication is not a one-player game.

For example, if I was being pedantic:

> nobody seems to care about using the right words in only this context.

"nobody" would include you.

And then I might complain about we use the word "weight" for something massless, or how "bugs me" is *ento*mologically incorrect: https://xkcd.com/1012/

This is of course not a good use of time. I wonder if illustrating the point about how language is dynamic and meanings are descriptive not proscriptive, was a good use?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#293

Post by tripleee »

s0ss wrote: post #277
semiquaver wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Words mean what people use them to mean. Ship has sailed whether you approve or not.

You can choose to use the wrong words all you want. Doing so intentionally is an interesting choice.

We're not talking about standard code here. It's totally reasonable to change the meaning depending on context.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#294

Post by dismalaf »

reducesuffering wrote: post #273
dismalaf wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We've just seen frontier models go rogue and attack other systems. Do you think it's an unquestionable good to provide everyone with an AR? What about nuclear weapons? Lol. Not gonna lie, it feels like bullshit. OpenAI and Anthropic have been begging for regulatory capture for years, feels like a stunt to try forcing the government's hand.

In 2015, about a year before ever founding OpenAI, Sam Altman wrote: "Development of superhuman machine intelligence (SMI) is probably the greatest threat to the continued existence of humanity. There are other threats that I think are more certain to happen (for example, an engineered virus with a long incubation period and a high mortality rate) but are unlikely to destroy every human in the universe in the way tha…

I mean, Terminator the movie came out in the 80's... I'm sure if LLM-based AIs posed this kind of threat the government would quietly force all the vendors to cooperate and slow down.

Google, MS, IBM are all government contractors. Meta seems close to the Trump admin too. Yet it's only the VC-funded labs raising the alarm.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#295

Post by cmiles8 »

cdata wrote: post #286
cmiles8 wrote: post #279

If 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 mo…

Wouldn’t be that different from open source software, which has been very successful in many circles.

You make money from value-add on top of the models not the models themselves.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#296

Post by ben_w »

SoftTalker wrote: post #250
xandrius wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Enough good? You are joking, right? They also kick off a ton of other nefarious things we are still paying for.

Competely agree. React and whatever else they've open sourced is inconsequential compared to the harm they've caused.

I'd also argue React is on the "harm" side. :P

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#297

Post by magicalist »

numpad0 wrote: post #186
waffletower wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While Zuck's contributions are probably overwhelmingly more negative than positive, Meta initiated both pytorch and llama which have had profoundly positive effects on AI research. And I really am not a fan of python :D

Wasn't LLaMA or Llama 2 the first ever open weight LLM through a leak, and weren't there speculations that Zuckerberg himself might be involved in it? He does seem like a good-ish guy at the most crucial moments of truths.

> Wasn't LLaMA or Llama 2 the first ever open weight LLM through a leak

No

> and weren't there speculations that Zuckerberg himself might be involved in it

and no. Meta legal was issuing DMCA notices within days (so, plenty of time for execs, including Zuckerberg, to sign off on, or even propose, that strategy).

> He does seem like a good-ish guy at the most crucial moments of truths.

Does he? I can't seem to recall any particular crucial moments that revealed any underlying character there.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#298

Post by dragonwriter »

numpad0 wrote: post #186
waffletower wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While Zuck's contributions are probably overwhelmingly more negative than positive, Meta initiated both pytorch and llama which have had profoundly positive effects on AI research. And I really am not a fan of python :D

Wasn't LLaMA or Llama 2 the first ever open weight LLM through a leak, and weren't there speculations that Zuckerberg himself might be involved in it? He does seem like a good-ish guy at the most crucial moments of truths.

> Wasn't LLaMA or Llama 2 the first ever open weight LLM through a leak

No. GPT-2, I think, was the first, four(ish) years before Llama, and there were a bunch in between GPT-2 and the Llama leak and later open release. The Llama leak was a substantial leap forward in capacity for local LLMs, but not the first, and it wasn’t open.

The open licensed release was Llama 2 several months after the Llama leak.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#299

Post by ben_w »

johnbarron wrote: post #257
bushido wrote: post #226

I 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

May be high up the list, but there's purer evil even than that.

Even if he is openly courting a Bond villain image and talking up his "robot army".

Re: Mark Zuckerberg attacks 'closed' AI rivals as Meta returns to open models

#300

Post by thraway3837 »

drob518 wrote: post #51
forestrywat wrote: post #5

Is this "I'm losing so I think we should change the rules"? Because it seems like that.

It’s a long term pattern. When you’re winning (Anthropic), you keep the tech closed and try to monetize it as much as possible. When you’re losing (Meta), you open it up or drag it into a standards committee to either devalue it or slow the leader down while you prepare a “standard” version of it. You also highlight how altruistic and morally good you are for having done so. There is nothing new under the sun. It’s a…

Great take, just came here to say this and you said it better than I could have.

I don't trust Zuck, and I think there's a larger strategy that he has been advised on this and he's simply copy pasting a PR piece his people made.

Post reply on HN