461–470 of 965 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, they're not AI companies, necessarily, or at least not only AI companies, but the big hardware firms tend to have engineers at the helm. That includes Nvidia, AMD, and Intel. (Counterpoint: Apple)
Tim Cook is probably the greatest CFO any company could know. But Apple's capital is vastly squandered with Tim as CEO.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For the instruction tuned models, Llama 3 8B is even significantly better than Llama 2 70B!
how much vram does the 8B model use?
Quick thoughts - Major arch changes are not that major, mostly GQA and tokenizer improvements. Tokenizer improvement is a under-explored domain IMO. 15T tokens is a ton! 400B model performance looks great, can’t wait for that to be released. Might be time to invest in a Mac studio! OpenAI probably needs to release GPT-5 soon to convince people they are still staying ahead.
The highest end Mac Studio with 196GB of ram won't even be enough to run a Q4 quant of the 400B+ (don't forget the +) model. At this point, one have to consider an Epyc for CPU inference or costlier gpu solutions like the "popular" 8xA100 80GB...
An if it's a dense model like the other llamas, it will be pretty slow..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which specific GPT-4 model is this? gpt-4-0613? gpt-4-0125-preview?
This is mostly from technical report from OpenAI[1]. API performs better as I said in my previous comment. API models(0613/0125 etc.) also uses user data for training which could leak the benchmark data. [1]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.08774.pdf
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is Meta doing it though? This is an astronomical investment. What do they gain from it?
It’s a shame it can’t just be giving back to the community and not questioned. Why is selfishness from companies who’ve benefited from social resources not a surprising event vs the norm.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes or no, do you conceed that for almost everyone, none of what you said matters, and almost everyone can use llama 3 for their use case, and that basically nobody is going to have to worry about being sued, other than maybe like Google, or equivalent? You are using all these scary words without saying the obvious, which is that for almost everyone, none of that matters.
I don't support GP's claims, but you have to realize that you're "almost everyone" up until you build something very successful with lots of capital at stake, and then you definitely become "someone special" and have to think ahead about how the licenses of your models impact you. Of course random individuals don't care much about the licenses on their personal AI projects. But if you intend to grow something signifi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Quest is the top selling VR headset by a very large margin. He's well positioned to take that market when it eventually matures a bit. Once the tech gets there, say in a decade we might see most people primarily consume content via VR and phones. That's movies, games, TV, sporting events, concerts.
I just can’t imagine sitting with a headset on, next to my wife, watching the NFL. It could very well change for me, but it does not sound appealing.
For me the tech isn't they're yet. I'd buy a Quest with an HDMI input today if they sold it. But for some reason these are two different products
They've got a console for it as well, https://www.meta.ai/ And announcing a lot of integration across the Meta product suite, https://about.fb.com/news/2024/04/meta-ai-assistant-built-wi... Neglected to include comparisons against GPT-4-Turbo or Claude Opus, so I guess it's far from being a frontier model. We'll see how it fares in the LLM Arena.
And they even allow you to use it without logging in. Didnt expect that from Meta.
They've got a console for it as well, https://www.meta.ai/ And announcing a lot of integration across the Meta product suite, https://about.fb.com/news/2024/04/meta-ai-assistant-built-wi... Neglected to include comparisons against GPT-4-Turbo or Claude Opus, so I guess it's far from being a frontier model. We'll see how it fares in the LLM Arena.
> Meta AI isn't available yet in your country Where is it available? I got this in Norway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes or no, do you conceed that for almost everyone, none of what you said matters, and almost everyone can use llama 3 for their use case, and that basically nobody is going to have to worry about being sued, other than maybe like Google, or equivalent? You are using all these scary words without saying the obvious, which is that for almost everyone, none of that matters.
Would you then say that in general Open Source doesn't matter for almost everyone? Most people running Linux aren't serving 700 million customers or operating military killbots with it after all.
Most of the qualities that come with open source (which also come with llama 3), matter a lot.
But no, it is not a binary, yes or no thing, where something is either open source and useful or not.
Instead, there is a very wide spectrum is licensing agreements. And even if something does not fit the very specific and exact definition of open source, it can still be "almost" there and therefore be basically as useful.
I am objecting to the idea that any slight deviation from the highly specific definition of open source means that it no longer "counts".
Even though, If something is 99.9% the same as open source, then you get 99.9% of the benefits, and it is dishonest to say that it is significantly different than open source.