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

351–360 of 631 posts

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

#351

Post by drTobiasFunke »

ViktorRay wrote: post #20

Comments 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…

Open weight models are not open software. Its better than closed blackbox models sold by Sam and Mario, but Zuck supporting open weight models when he (and other big boys) hoards all the compute required to run any model, including open weight models only shows that he realized he cant beat Sam and Mario, so wants their leverage to go away.

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

#352

Post by ungovernableCat »

gorgoiler wrote: post #347
ungovernableCat wrote: post #225

From Zuck's own words "we will resume releasing some open source models soon" Why did you pause releasing them in the first place? Why release only some? Pushes for export controls on China who have released open weights on much more powerful models than Meta (and I believe that trend's not changing any time soon). I guess open models are bad if they're communist. The entire essay has not one mention of the Metaverse…

I can’t quite parse what you’re saying in your second paragraph, but if you are saying “[Zuckerberg then] pushes for export controls on China” then that’s different to what he’s saying, namely: “I do not believe restricting access to foreign open source models is an effective solution.”

"Export controls on silicon have been successful for slowing the progress of foreign labs during this critical period, so it is the right strategic move to continue those."

https://www.meta.com/thefutureisforeveryone/

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

#353

Post by strtok »

kylecazar wrote: post #25
ViktorRay wrote: post #20

Comments 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…

Most probably believe this is a good thing, but don't want to give Zuckerberg credit because a) he's had a profoundly negative impact on society and b) the strategy is transparent, he's trying to commoditize his closed rivals, it's not out of principle. I personally think more open models are a good thing regardless of motive.

Unless weights are being manipulated to make the model respond in a way that favors the owners.

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

#354

Post by [deleted] »

tehlike wrote: post #243
axegon_ wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's simply not true. The reason why llama is open source is simply because it got leaked, then llama.cpp was the real game changer which was built from the ground up in depressingly short amount of time. Meta had no choice but to take the L and "support" the open source community. The angry "I-hate-you-and-I-hope-you-die" kind of support.

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

[deleted]

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

#355

Post by timmmmmmay »

Forgeties79 wrote: post #336
andy99 wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s hard to know in retrospect what was strategy and what was dumb luck. This was in the midst of hysterical calls to limit access by “AI researchers” and safety/ethics types, when very facile takes still has a lot of sway (I think we’ll feel the same in three years about the current Fable stuff). It may have been hard for Meta to just release it outright. What ended up happening was fairly limited gating followed b…

I don’t understand how you can look at what’s happening right now and call people simply calling for caution “hysterical”

I don't think you can characterize the discussion around then as simple calling for caution. There was a serious attempt to keep all access to even very basic LLM techniques locked into essentially an exclusive guild.

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

#357

Post by razster »

kylecazar wrote: post #25
ViktorRay wrote: post #20

Comments 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…

Most probably believe this is a good thing, but don't want to give Zuckerberg credit because a) he's had a profoundly negative impact on society and b) the strategy is transparent, he's trying to commoditize his closed rivals, it's not out of principle. I personally think more open models are a good thing regardless of motive.

This can be said for a lot of different matters. Reading this gave me some Déjà vu vibes. My personal take, I don't see this as a good thing. Yes I dislike META with a passion and will refuse to use this model or allow it in any of my workflows. So I guess I may never know, which I'm ok with that.

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

#358

Post by [deleted] »

s0ss wrote: post #253
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…

Open source != open weight. Big difference and it bugs me that nobody seems to care about using the right words in only this context.

[deleted]

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

#359

Post by razster »

A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #30
ViktorRay wrote: post #20

Comments 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…

> But this is an unquestionably good thing right? Their efforts in open AI are by far the best thing Facebook/Meta have ever done. They opened the door to the Chinese, who are doing excellent work, and between them they are preventing the concentration of power and the rise of monopoly pricing. This is enough to absolve them of almost any sin. If I were a utilitarian, I'd unironically be a Zuckerberg fan right now.

I'll never allow anything related by META to touch my system/workflow. They're a cancer and I will stick to that. I see 0 good from this.

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

#360

Post by madrox »

ViktorRay wrote: post #20

Comments 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…

It is dangerous to admire or despise anyone for who they are; it's ok to say someone did something good or bad.
Post reply on HN