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

Gemma: New Open Models

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 543 posts

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#401

Post by robswc »

robswc wrote: post #257

I personally can't take any models from google seriously. I was asking it about the Japanese Heian period and it told me such nonsensical information you would have thought it was a joke or parody. Some highlights were "Native American women warriors rode across the grassy plains of Japan, carrying Yumi" and "A diverse group of warriors, including a woman of European descent wielding a katana, stand together in camar…

Follow Up:

Wow, now I can't make images of astronauts without visors because that would be "harmful" to the fictional astronauts. How can I take google seriously?

https://g.co/gemini/share/d4c548b8b715

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#402

Post by GaggiX »

verticalscaler wrote: post #308
justinzollars wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine the meetings.

Well we can just ask Gemma to generate images of the meetings, no need to imagine. ;)

I wouldn't be surprised if there were actually only white men in the meeting, as opposed to what Gemini will produce.

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#403

Post by slowmovintarget »

a2128 wrote: post #243
simonw wrote: post #229

The terms of use: https://ai.google.dev/gemma/terms and https://ai.google.dev/gemma/prohibited_use_policy Something that caught my eye in the terms: > Google may update Gemma from time to time, and you must make reasonable efforts to use the latest version of Gemma. One of the biggest benefits of running your own model is that it can protect you from model updates that break your carefully tested prompts, so I’m not…

This is actually not that unusual. Stable Diffusion's license, CreativeML Open RAIL-M, has the exact same clause: "You shall undertake reasonable efforts to use the latest version of the Model." Obviously updating the model is not very practical when you're using finetuned versions, and people still use old versions of Stable Diffusion. But it does make me fear the possibility that if they ever want to "revoke" every…

So if they wish to apply censorship they forgot, or suddenly discovered a reason for, they want you to be obligated to take it.

Good faith possibilities: Copyright liability requires retraining, or altering the underlying training set.

Gray area: "Safety" concerns where the model recommends criminal behavior (see uncensored GPT 4 evaluations).

Bad faith: Censorship or extra weighting added based on political agenda or for-pay skewing of results.

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#404

Post by ilc »

carom wrote: post #363
p1esk wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://twitter.com/yar_vol/status/1760314018575634842

I've worked at Google. It is the organization with highest concentration of engineering talent I've ever been at. Almost to the point that it is ridiculous because you have extremely good engineers working on internal reporting systems for middle managers.

If everyone is great. Someone has to draw the short straw.

At MIT they said: You know the kid who sat at the front of the room. Now you are with ALL of the kids who sat in the front of the room. Guess what? There's still going to be a kid who sits at the front of the room.

I'd imagine Google or anyplace with a stiff engineering filter will have the same issues.

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#405

Post by reissbaker »

wahnfrieden wrote: post #364
legohead wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like it's "reasonable" for you not to update then.

It says you must make efforts (to a reasonable extent), not that you must give a reason for not making efforts

This is a TOS, meaning their enforcement option is a lawsuit. In court, if you convincingly argue why it would take an unreasonable amount of effort to update, you win. They can't compel you to unreasonable effort as per their own TOS.

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#406

Post by espadrine »

jmorgan wrote: post #355
alekandreev wrote: post #3

Hello on behalf of the Gemma team! We are really excited to answer any questions you may have about our models. Opinions are our own and not of Google DeepMind.

Hi! This is such an exciting release. Congratulations! I work on Ollama and used the provided GGUF files to quantize the model. As mentioned by a few people here, the 4-bit integer quantized models (which Ollama defaults to) seem to have strange output with non-existent words and funny use of whitespace. Do you have a link /reference as to how the models were converted to GGUF format? And is it expected that quantizi…

As a data point, using the Huggingface Transformers 4-bit quantization yields reasonable results: https://twitter.com/espadrine/status/1760355758309298421

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#407

Post by sho_hn »

robswc wrote: post #341
sho_hn wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you expect these smaller models to do well at knowledge base/Wikipedia replacement tasks? Small models are for reasoning tasks that are not overly dependent on world knowledge.

Gemini is the only one that does this.

Most of the 7B models are bad at knowledge-type queries.

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#408

Post by trackflak »

robswc wrote: post #266
freedomben wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know anything about these twitter accounts so I don't know how credible they are, but here are some examples for your downvoters that I'm guessing just think you're just trolling or grossly exaggerating: https://twitter.com/aginnt/status/1760159436323123632 https://twitter.com/Black_Pilled/status/1760198299443966382

Yea. Just ask it anything about historical people/cultures and it will seemingly lobotomize itself. I asked it about early Japan and it talked about how European women used Katanas and how Native Americans rode across the grassy plains carrying traditional Japanese weapons. Pure made up nonsense that not even primitive models would get wrong. Not sure what they did to it. I asked it why it assumed Native Americans we…

From one of the Twitter threads linked above:

> they insert random keyword in the prompts randomly to counter bias, that got revealed with something else I think. Had T shirts written with "diverse" on it as artifact

This was exposed as being the case with OpenAI's DALL-E as well - someone had typed a prompt of "Homer Simpson wearing a namebadge" and it generated an image of Homer with brown skin wearing a namebadge that said 'ethnically ambiguous'.

This is ludicrous - if they are fiddling with your prompt in this way, it will only stoke more frustration and resentment - achieving the opposite of why this has been implemented. Surely if we want diversity we will ask for it, but sometimes you don't, and that should be at the user's discretion.\

Another thread for context: https://twitter.com/napoleon21st/status/1760116228746805272

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#409

Post by CodesInChaos »

res0nat0r wrote: post #378
catchnear4321 wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

reasonable effort - meaning if their changes meaningfully impact my usage, negatively, it would be unreasonable to ask me to upgrade. sounds good. this is not financial advice and ianal.

Isn't this just lawyer speak for "we update our model a lot, and we've never signed off on saying we're going to support every previous release we've ever published, and may turn them off at any time, don't complain about it when we do."

We're talking about downloadable weights here, so they can't turn them off, or force you (through technical means) to use a newer version.

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#410

Post by reissbaker »

res0nat0r wrote: post #378
catchnear4321 wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

reasonable effort - meaning if their changes meaningfully impact my usage, negatively, it would be unreasonable to ask me to upgrade. sounds good. this is not financial advice and ianal.

Isn't this just lawyer speak for "we update our model a lot, and we've never signed off on saying we're going to support every previous release we've ever published, and may turn them off at any time, don't complain about it when we do."

It's a local model, they can't turn it off. It's files on your computer without network access.
Post reply on HN