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

511–520 of 533 posts

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

#511

Post by OsrsNeedsf2P »

larodi wrote: post #474
blueSky1989 wrote: post #67

My favorite paragraph from Zuckerberg's writeup: """ [...] it is surprising that the discourse from many developing AI is so filled with doom. I do not understand why anyone who believes that AI will eliminate most jobs and much of humanity's relevance would rush to build that future. The notion that AI is so dangerous that the only safe path is an extreme concentration of power seems inherently problematic. Historic…

Am I the only one getting the impression this dude was merely lucky back in the day, in fact at the right time, rather than having been super intelligent nor forward thinking… ? I mean - given all his throw outs in media and his apparent burn of nearly 80bn for a failed 3D world?

Disclaimer- ex Meta employee.

Horizon was horribly managed, but also we threw all of our unannounced projects under that umbrella to make it look better for shareholders when we finally cut it. The original LLM research, smart glasses, and a bunch of other projects were under the "Reality Labs" business expense.

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

#513

Post by gregw2 »

ElProlactin wrote: post #149
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…

If you don't trust his intentions, how can you trust anything he does? Just take the opening of this post: > We are fortunate to live at an incredible moment in history. In the next few years, people will be able to use superintelligence beyond human capacity to create and discover extraordinary new things, build new businesses, express new ideas, learn new concepts, and advance our health and quality of life. > The…

Is there any reason Zuckerberg/Meta should get huge lawsuits and criticism for addictive design and say, Pinchai/Google/Youtube should not?

Not a troll question, just wondering.

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

#514

Post by victorbjorklund »

canyon289 wrote: post #247
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…

Disclaimer, I work on Gemma and open models at Deepmind and the opinions here are my own There were open models from EleutherAI (GPT-Neo), Google Brain (T5X, Bert), and HuggingFace was promoting open models (and others doing open work I haven't listed here) all prior to 2023 and the big Chatgpt moment. https://github.com/EleutherAI/gpt-neo/releases https://github.com/google-research/bert https://github.com/google-res…

Google had done much to lay the framework for current models (and is currently doing good stuff with Gemma). But after ChatGPT took off I don’t think Google continued to release any big models freely before meta released its models (maybe it was because Google didn’t have any models at all during the time)

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

#515

Post by htrp »

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…

Do you remember opt??

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

#516

Post by loveiswork »

sarjann wrote: post #499
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…

Fundamentally I always try to look at incentives. It's not that they are good or bad but that incentives favour certain behaviours. Google is incentivised to collect a bunch of data (like FB) to improve their ad serving etc. Apple does not have that incentive as they don't make as much off advertising as hardware / app revenue. NVIDIA is friendly with open source as they want to commoditise the model layer and take t…

- Juicing community discovery of new useful AI features they can incorporate into their own apps

- Juicing demand for AI workloads for which they can lease out Meta data centers to establish themselves in the infrastructure as a service space

- Preventing extreme capital concentration at any single competitor

- Fostering a market of small innovative companies they can then acquire

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

#518

Post by easygenes »

In the lead-up to the Grok 4.5 release, the CEO of HuggingFace was petitioning Elon Musk to open the weights. It’s odd to me that he didn’t accept, as the model is at a similar competitive level to Muse 1.2. It would have been good PR and essentially zero risk, while getting ahead of Meta who seemed likely to go back to shipping weights soon.

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

#519

Post by watwut »

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”

They were provably hysterical, again and again, just to say 3 months later "that model was weak sure but this time we will have the real dangerous one" and again.

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

#520

Post by floriferous »

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.

Let's be honest, their model is not good enough for them to get any ROI on it if it was closed source.

They're making it look like a benevolent decision, but they really don't have another option.

Post reply on HN