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

531–540 of 568 posts

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

#531

Post by throwatdem12311 »

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…

Fascist calling out other fascists for being fascists. Pot meet kettle. Don’t look at me look at the real bad guys over there!

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

#532

Post by throw0101d »

ben_w wrote: post #292
s0ss wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can choose to use the wrong words all you want. Doing so intentionally is an interesting choice.

Communication is not a one-player game. For example, if I was being pedantic: > nobody seems to care about using the right words in only this context. "nobody" would include you. And then I might complain about we use the word "weight" for something massless, or how "bugs me" is *ento*mologically incorrect: https://xkcd.com/1012/ This is of course not a good use of time. I wonder if illustrating the point about how l…

> And then I might complain about we use the word "weight" for something massless, or how "bugs me" is entomologically incorrect: https://xkcd.com/1012/

"Communicating": https://xkcd.com/1860/

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

#533

Post by spopejoy »

afro88 wrote: post #206
twright wrote: post #187

This paragraph is wild. > As a thought experiment, imagine only one person had a superintelligent lawyer. They would have an unfair advantage in court -- even if they were wrong on the merits. That would lead to a worse society. But now imagine everyone has a superintelligent lawyer. In this case, justice would be carried out much more fairly and efficiently than it is today when there is often an imbalance in skills…

I'm not a fan of Zuckerberg in the least, but one area a super intelligent lawyer would be fine at is being drowned in court filings and paperwork The bigger problem with his argument IMO is that even with open models, it's still the person or organisation with the most money / access to GPU compute winning. They run the larger model (or collection of models), they can process more tokens through them in the same amo…

> it's still the person or organisation with the most money / access to GPU compute winning.

Is it? Legal is rarely a genuine war of attrition and delays are the norm. AI is years/decades away from not needing humans in the loop verifying output, legal more than most. Correctness is more important than speed. Main skill is doc search but most cases easily fit in modern contexts.

So I don't think legal in particular needs the fastest/bestest compute.

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

#534

Post by deIeted »

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…

Well, the last part of what you said is redundant. I'd say the only reason Meta released some open-source stuff is because they wanted to try to minimize the growth of what was already out there so they could give themselves time, because zuck went all in on VR and not all in on AI. What is he going to change his name to next?

It was literally like December. We're gonna rename ourselves Meta. January, ChatGPT 3.whatever has been released, and everyone was like, "What's this new AI stuff?"

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

#537

Post by alfiedotwtf »

tpm wrote: post #456
Forgeties79 wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t understand how you can look at what’s happening right now and call people simply calling for caution “hysterical”

> what’s happening right now And that would be closed-AI companies failing to keep their AI closed in a box, thus proving open-AI proponents right and the hysterical group wrong?

I think the term you're looking for is Marketing. If these labs actually had their LLMs attack other company's networks, wouldn't at least a handful of people be locked up by now?

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

#538

Post by therealpygon »

AnonymousPlanet wrote: post #447
canyon289 wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

And yet it's not called eleuther.cpp or bert.cpp. And the famous subreddit isn't called r/localbert but r/locallama.

In fairness, people also don’t say “let me ask llama” or “llama told me…” like they do with “GPT”.

Colloquialisms don’t establish importance, just popularity.

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

#539

Post by xyproto »

axegon_ wrote: post #509
xyproto wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NVIDIA created quality (but proprietary) drivers for Linux early on, when supporting Linux at all was not a given. They should get at least a tiny bit of credit for this.

Quality? Calling those "quality" is a bit of a stretch. Installing was and still is a gamble and so is every tiny system update. That hasn't changed a bit. And I'm saying that as someone who was first introduced to Linux on a Matrox GPU.

As long as one didn't have to downgrade X11, they were straightforward to install. You are right that upgrades was a pain, but I believe the drivers themselves were on-par with the Windows drivers.

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

#540

Post by xyproto »

throw1234567891 wrote: post #502
iwjxjwjdjw wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. They’ve all but abandoned these so called quality drivers since, so no, no credit is deserved.

Unless it's a 24 hour clock. Then only once.

Achtually... if it's a 31556952 second clock, it's only right once a year.
Post reply on HN