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

51–60 of 543 posts

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#51

Post by gaogao »

gaogao wrote: post #44
Havoc wrote: post #4

Taking a page out of metas book with open models. I wonder what the game plan here is. Nice that it allows commercial use!

Mostly to boost research and commercial usage around JAX/Gemini is my read. Any internal research using Gemma is now more easily externally reproducible, external research and frameworks are easier to translate over, goodwill especially from researchers.

There's also less of a special sauce for text models itself these days with the propietary being more on the pre-training data and training stack (e.g. how to get 10k GPUs/TPUs running together smoothly). Multi-modal models (or adjacent like Sora) are less likely to be open sourced in the immediate term.

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#52

Post by dartharva »

kathleenfromgdm wrote: post #47
sbarre wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can the Gemma models be downloaded to run locally, like open-source models Llama2, Mistral, etc ? Or is your definition of "open" different?

Yes, you can get started downloading the model and running inference on Kaggle: https://www.kaggle.com/models/google/gemma ; for a full list of ways to interact with the model, you can check out https://ai.google.dev/gemma .

Can we have llamafile releases as well?

https://github.com/Mozilla-Ocho/llamafile

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#53

Post by espadrine »

vorticalbox wrote: post #40
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.

are there plans to release an official GGUF version to use with llama.ccp?

It is already part of the release on Huggingface: https://huggingface.co/google/gemma-7b/blob/main/gemma-7b.gg...

It is a pretty clean release! I had some 500 issues with Kaggle validating my license approval, so you might too, but after a few attempts I could access the model.

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#54

Post by yakorevivan »

margorczynski wrote: post #37

Is there a chance we'll get a model without the "aligment" (lobotomization)? There are many examples where answers from Gemini are garbage because of the ideological fine tuning.

They have released finetuning code too. You can finetune it to remove the alignment finetuning. I believe it would take just a few hours at max and a couple of dollars.

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#56

Post by trisfromgoogle »

artninja1988 wrote: post #21
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.

I find the snyde remarks around open source in the paper and announcement rather off putting. As the ecosystem evolves, we urge the corporate AI community to move beyond demanding to be taken seriously as a player in open source for models that are not actually open, and avoid preaching with a PR statement that can be interpreted as uniformed at best or malicious at worst.

It would be great to understand what you mean by this -- we have a deep love for open source and the open developer ecosystem. Our open source team also released a blog today describing the rationale and approach for open models and continuing AI releases in the open ecosystem:

https://opensource.googleblog.com/2024/02/building-open-mode...

Thoughts and feedback welcome, as always.

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#58

Post by brainless »

impulser_ wrote: post #27

Go back 5 years and ask anyone on this site what companies do you think will be the most open about AI in the future OpenAI, Meta, or Google. I bet 10/10 people would pick OpenAI. Now today Meta and Google, both trillion dollars companies, are releasing very powerful open models with the ability to be used commercially. Ironic.

This article states quite an impressive list of open source tools that Google has released for years in the past. This is no surprise coming from* them. Google has released some large pieces of source in other domains as well, Chromium comes to mind, which probably impacts most Internet users directly.

The question is not about Google but about OpenAI.

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#59

Post by OJFord »

benpacker wrote: post #41
sbarre wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I came here wondering if these models are "open" in the sense that they'll show up on sites like Ollama where you can download and run them locally. Am I correct to conclude that this means they eventually will? It's unclear to me from Google's docs exactly what "open" means for Gemma

Yes - they are open weights and open inference code, which means they can be integrated into Ollama. They are not “open training” (either in the training code or training data sense), so they are not reproducible, which some have suggested ought to be a component of the definition of open models.

It really should shouldn't it? I'm quite ML-naïve, but surely providing the model without 'training code or training data' is just like providing a self-hostable binary without the source code? Nobody calls that open source, it's not even source available.

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#60

Post by alekandreev »

zitterbewegung wrote: post #6
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.

Do you have a plan of releasing higher parameter models?

We have many great things in research and development phases, so stay tuned. I’m hopeful we can share more in the coming weeks and month!
Post reply on HN