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

Llama 2

ai.meta.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 860 posts

Re: Llama 2

#61

Post by dooraven »

whimsicalism wrote: post #43
dooraven wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google's model is not as capable as llama-derived models, so I think they would actually benefit from this. Google's publically available model isn't as capable. But they certainly have models that are far better already in house.

I have no idea how you are so certain of that. Meta is definitely ahead of Google in terms of NLP expertise and has been for a while. I suspect that Google released their best model at the time with Bard.

We still don't have access to Imagen last I checked, it's still in restricted access. We don't have access to SoundStorm or MusicLM

https://imagen.research.google/

https://google-research.github.io/seanet/soundstorm/examples...

https://google-research.github.io/seanet/musiclm/examples/

Why would it be surprising that they have better models for resarch that they don't want to give out yet?

Re: Llama 2

#62

Post by capableweb »

jmiskovic wrote: post #58
cheeseface wrote: post #11

Would really want to see some benchmarks against ChatGPT / GPT-4. The improvements in the given benchmarks for the larger models (Llama v1 65B and Llama v2 70B) are not huge, but hard to know if still make a difference for many common use cases.

Then why not read their paper? "The largest Llama 2-Chat model is competitive with ChatGPT. Llama 2-Chat 70B model has a win rate of 36% and a tie rate of 31.5% relative to ChatGPT."

Do they specify which GPT version they used? Could Llama 2 really beat GPT-4?

Re: Llama 2

#63

Post by rvz »

Great move. Meta is at the finish line in AI in the race to zero and you can make money out of this model.

A year ago, many here have written off Meta and have now changed their opinions more times like the weather.

It seems that many have already forgotten Meta still has their AI labs and can afford to put things on hold and reboot other areas in their business. Unlike these so-called AI startups who are pre-revenue and unprofitable.

Why would so many underestimate Meta when they can drive everything to zero. Putting OpenAI and Google at risk of getting upended by very good freely released AI models like LLama 2?

Re: Llama 2

#65

Post by chaxor »

cheeseface wrote: post #11

Would really want to see some benchmarks against ChatGPT / GPT-4. The improvements in the given benchmarks for the larger models (Llama v1 65B and Llama v2 70B) are not huge, but hard to know if still make a difference for many common use cases.

It would be nice to see 6 of them trained for different purposes by combining 5 of their outputs together and 1 trained to summarize for the most complete and correct output. If we are to trust the leaks about GPT-4, this may be a more fair comparison, even if it is only ~10-20% of the size or so.

Re: Llama 2

#66

Post by whimsicalism »

dooraven wrote: post #61
whimsicalism wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no idea how you are so certain of that. Meta is definitely ahead of Google in terms of NLP expertise and has been for a while. I suspect that Google released their best model at the time with Bard.

We still don't have access to Imagen last I checked, it's still in restricted access. We don't have access to SoundStorm or MusicLM https://imagen.research.google/ https://google-research.github.io/seanet/soundstorm/examples... https://google-research.github.io/seanet/musiclm/examples/ Why would it be surprising that they have better models for resarch that they don't want to give out yet?

Because I work in NLP so I have a good sense of the different capabilities of different firms and for the Bard release, it would have made more sense for them to have a more limited release of a better model for PR reasons than what actually happened.

The other things you are describing are just standard for research paper releases.

Re: Llama 2

#67

Post by freedomben »

WastingMyTime89 wrote: post #46
dooraven wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google's model is not as capable as llama-derived models, so I think they would actually benefit from this. Google's publically available model isn't as capable. But they certainly have models that are far better already in house.

Do they? Considering how much was at stack in term of PR when OpenAI released ChatGPT, I would be surprised that Google didn’t put out the best they could.

The other end of the PR stake was safety/alignment. If Google released a well functioning model, but it said some unsavory things or carried out requests that the public doesn't find agreeable, it could make Google look bad.

Re: Llama 2

#68

Post by VWWHFSfQ »

nerdix wrote: post #23
minimaxir wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an oddly high number for blocking competition. OpenAI's ChatGPT hit 100 million MAUs in January, and has gone down since. It's essentially a "Amazon and Google don't use this k thx."

I think it's aimed at other social networks. TikTok has 1 billion monthly active users for instance

I think TikTok would just use it anyway even if they were denied a license (if they even bothered asking for one). They've never really cared about that kind of stuff.

Re: Llama 2

#69

Post by swyx »

rajko_rad wrote: post #18

Hey HN, we've released tools that make it easy to test LLaMa 2 and add it to your own app! Model playground here: https://llama2.ai Hosted chat API here: https://replicate.com/a16z-infra/llama13b-v2-chat If you want to just play with the model, llama2.ai is a very easy way to do it. So far, we’ve found the performance is similar to GPT-3.5 with far fewer parameters, especially for creative tasks and interactions. Dev…

its not clear but can we also download the model with this Llama v2 Cog thing? EDIT: Meta is being extremely prompt, just got sent the download instructions https://twitter.com/swyx/status/1681351712718876673

also is it now Llama or LLaMA since the website says Llama? lol

Re: Llama 2

#70

Post by whimsicalism »

chaxor wrote: post #60
whimsicalism wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google's model is not as capable as llama-derived models, so I think they would actually benefit from this. > I wouldn't be surprised if Amazon does as well. I would - they are not a very major player in this space. TikTok also meets this definition and probably doesn't have LLM.

Google has far better models than llama based models. They just simply don't put them facing the public. It is pretty ridiculous that they essentially just set a marketing team with no programming experience to write Bard, but that shouldn't fool anyone into believing they don't have capable models in Google. If Deepmind were to actually provide what they have in some usable form, it would likely be quite good. Despi…

I work in this field. I would love to see what you are basing these assertions off of.

> they mostly work in areas tangential to 'just chatbots' (e.g. how to improve science with novel GNNs, etc)

Yes, Alphabet has poured tons of money into exotic ML research whereas Meta just kept pouring more money into more & deeper NLP research.

Post reply on HN