Open source AI is the path forward

Post by Palomides » Tue, Jul 23, 2024, 6:39 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #171

Palomides wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

source available is absolutely not the same as open source you are playing very loosely with terms that have specific, widely accepted definitions (e.g. https://opensource.org/osd ) I don't get why you think it would be useful to call LLMs with published weights "open source"

> terms that have specific, widely accepted definitions OSF's definition is far from the only one [1]. Switzerland is currently implementing CH Open's definition, the EU another one, et cetera . > I don't get why you think it would be useful to call LLMs with published weights "open source" I don't. I'm saying that if the choice is between open weights or open weights + open training data, open weights will win becau…

Post by ladzoppelin » Tue, Jul 23, 2024, 6:40 PM UTC

advael wrote: post #324

cs702 wrote: post #74

> We’re releasing Llama 3.1 405B, the first frontier-level open source AI model, as well as new and improved Llama 3.1 70B and 8B models. Bravo! While I don't agree with Zuck's views and actions on many fronts, on this occasion I think he and the AI folks at Meta deserve our praise and gratitude. With this release, they have brought the cost of pretraining a frontier 400B+ parameter model to ZERO for pretty much ever…

Look, absolutely zero people in the world should trust any tech company when they say they care about or will keep commitments to the open-source ecosystem in any capacity. Nevertheless, it is occasionally strategic for them to do so, and there can be ancillary benefits for said ecosystem in those moments where this is the best play for them to harm their competitors For now, Meta seems to release Llama models in way…

Post by quasse » Tue, Jul 23, 2024, 6:43 PM UTC

ori_b wrote: post #346

advael wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look, absolutely zero people in the world should trust any tech company when they say they care about or will keep commitments to the open-source ecosystem in any capacity. Nevertheless, it is occasionally strategic for them to do so, and there can be ancillary benefits for said ecosystem in those moments where this is the best play for them to harm their competitors For now, Meta seems to release Llama models in way…

> If that ever stops being the case, you should fork rather than trust their judgment. Fork what? The secret sauce is in the training data and infrastructure. I don't think either of those is currently open.

Post by fragmede » Tue, Jul 23, 2024, 6:44 PM UTC

aiauthoritydev wrote: post #275

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #7

“The Heavy Press Program was a Cold War-era program of the United States Air Force to build the largest forging presses and extrusion presses in the world.” This ”program began in 1944 and concluded in 1957 after construction of four forging presses and six extruders, at an overall cost of $279 million. Six of them are still in operation today, manufacturing structural parts for military and commercial aircraft” [1].…

Overall government doing anything is a bad idea. There are cases however where government is the only entity that can do certain things. These are things that involve military, law enforcement etc. Outside of this we should rely on private industry and for-profit industry as much as possible.

Post by exe34 » Tue, Jul 23, 2024, 6:45 PM UTC

wrs wrote: post #330

exe34 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the training data is the source.

I don’t think even that is true. I conjecture that Facebook couldn’t reproduce the model weights if they started over with the same training data, because I doubt such a huge training run is a reproducible deterministic process. I don’t think anyone has “the” source.