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

The Llama 4 herd

ai.meta.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 695 posts

Re: The Llama 4 herd

#391

Post by sergiotapia »

CSMastermind wrote: post #362
mrbonner wrote: post #43

What an electrifying time to be alive! The last era that felt even remotely this dynamic was during the explosive rise of JavaScript frameworks—when it seemed like a new one dropped every quarter. Back then, though, the vibe was more like, “Ugh, another framework to learn?” Fast forward to now, and innovation is sprinting forward again—but this time, it feels like a thrilling ride we can’t wait to be part of.

I lived through the explosion of JavaScript frameworks and this feels way bigger to me. For me at least it feels closer to the rise of the early internet. Reminds me of 1996.

I agree I also lived through that time and you saw stuff like jQuery be supercede by marionette and backbone js maybe ember when it came out. But those were all kind of flavors of the same thing, ultimately speaking. With these new models coming out it seems like every time there's a new model it unlocks a gigantic New branch of application type

Re: The Llama 4 herd

#392

Post by xigency »

tucnak wrote: post #367
hydroreadsstuff wrote: post #243

This means GPUs are dead for local enthusiast AI. And SoCs with big RAM are in. Because 17B active parameters should reach enough performance on 256bit LPDDR5x.

This has been the case for a while now. 3090 hoarders were always just doing it for street cred or whatever, no way these guys are computing anything of actual value. Tenstorrent is on fire, though. For small businesses this is what matters. If 10M context is not a scam, I think we'll see SmartNIC adoption real soon. I would literally long AMD now because their Xilinx people are probably going to own the space real s…

Not a hoarder per-se but I bought a 24GB card on the secondary market. My privacy is valuable. I'm okay being a half-step or full-step behind in LLM or image diffusion if it means my data never leaves my machine.

Re: The Llama 4 herd

#393

Post by boroboro4 »

popinman322 wrote: post #383
reissbaker wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, it'll never run on a 4090. 17B is the active parameter count, not the total param count (and "active" doesn't mean you can slice just those params out and put them on the GPU — which parameters are active constantly changes, even per-token. "Active" just means you get tokens faster than a dense model). It's 109B total parameters, so you'd need at least 54.5GB VRAM just for the weights alone. A Framework Desktop,…

You can swap experts in and out of VRAM, it just increases inference time substantially. Depending on the routing function you can figure out all the active experts ahead of the forward pass for a single token and pipeline the expert loading.

Chosen expert (on each layer) depends on the input of previous layer. Not sure how you can preload the experts before forward pass.

Re: The Llama 4 herd

#394

Post by mark_l_watson »

I started running Llama 4 Scout on Groq using my Common Lisp client, and now trying Llama 4 Maverick on abacus.ai

Really impressive!

Also, check out the price/performance numbers: about $0.20 per million input tokens compared to about $5 for GPT-4o [1]

[1] https://x.com/kimmonismus/status/1908624648608133297

Re: The Llama 4 herd

#395

Post by kristianp »

I'd like to discuss the matter of size. Llama has gone from talking up an 8b model as capable to having a smallest model of 109b. What will be the sizes in a years time? Things are moving out of reach for commodity pc's, 128GB is possible, but expensive.

Re: The Llama 4 herd

#397

Post by cma »

vessenes wrote: post #245

I’m excited to try these models out, especially for some coding tasks, but I will say my first two engagements with them (at the meta.ai web interface) were not spectacular. Image generation is wayyy behind the current 4o. I also ask for a Hemingway essay relating RFK Jr’s bear carcass episode. The site’s Llama 4 response was not great stylistically and also had not heard of the bear carcass episode, unlike Grok, Cha…

They didn't release any new image gen today

Re: The Llama 4 herd

#398

Post by EasyMark »

ckrapu wrote: post #68

"It’s well-known that all leading LLMs have had issues with bias—specifically, they historically have leaned left when it comes to debated political and social topics. This is due to the types of training data available on the internet." Perhaps. Or, maybe, "leaning left" by the standards of Zuck et al. is more in alignment with the global population. It's a simpler explanation.

Wouldn't that depend on what countries data it was trained on? was it trained primarily on US data? European data? Asian data? an equal mix of them, a heavily weighted one from the US? The US skew pretty moderate on the world stage for political opinions, while European is pretty far left by most standards.

Re: The Llama 4 herd

#399

Post by EasyMark »

averageRoyalty wrote: post #321
ipsento606 wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it impossible to discuss bias without a shared understanding of what it actually means to be unbiased - or at least, a shared understanding of what the process of reaching an unbiased position looks like. 40% of Americans believe that God created the earth in the last 10,000 years. If I ask an LLM how old the Earth is, and it replies ~4.5 billion years old, is it biased?

40% of Americans is about 2% of the worlds population though. It's hardly biased, it's stating the current scientific stance over a fringe belief with no evidence.

I'd be wiling to say that 95% of Americans don't care what the rest of the world thinks about their religious opinions, though? You just need to know the audience for the poll and context. Is it to be consumed by Americans or the entire world?

Re: The Llama 4 herd

#400

Post by EasyMark »

tensor wrote: post #353
ckrapu wrote: post #68

"It’s well-known that all leading LLMs have had issues with bias—specifically, they historically have leaned left when it comes to debated political and social topics. This is due to the types of training data available on the internet." Perhaps. Or, maybe, "leaning left" by the standards of Zuck et al. is more in alignment with the global population. It's a simpler explanation.

Call me crazy, but I don't want an AI that bases its reasoning on politics. I want one that is primarily scientific driven, and if I ask it political questions it should give me representative answers. E.g. "The majority view in [country] is [blah] with the minority view being [bleh]." I have no interest in "all sides are equal" answers because I don't believe all information is equally informative nor equally true.

But if you don't incorporate some moral guidelines, I think if an AI is left to strictly decide what is best to happen to humans it will logically conclude that there needs to be a lot less of us or none of us left, without some bias tossed in there for humanistic concerns. The universe doesn't "care" if humans exist or not, but our impact on the planet is a huge negative if one creature's existence is as important as any other's
Post reply on HN