Live data from Hacker News

Local AI needs to be the norm

unix.foo

611–620 of 804 posts

Re: Local AI needs to be the norm

#611

I'm betting my startup on it. The subsidised model subscription will start to dry out and providers will lean heavier into locking down how they want their models to be used (Anhropic has been paving the way already). The only way forward is open weight models. If you are working on any LLM powered product be careful betting on utilising user subscriptions.

What is your startup?

Re: Local AI needs to be the norm

#612
post #212
post #80

They will be, and that moment is not that far off. We've got the progression in place already: first, large data centers could have performant LLMs, we are now firmly in "a bunch of servers with a couple of H100s each" territory, slowly going into "128 GB VRAM on a MacBook Pro or a Strix Halo". Within the next year, the pattern of "expensive remote LLM for planning, local slow-but-faster-than-human LLM for execution"…

> They will be, and that moment is not that far off. It's here, right now. I'm running quantized Qwen and Gemma on a decent, but three years old gaming rig (think RTX 3080 12GB and 32 GB RAM). Yes, it's slow, it has a small context window. But it can (given a proper harness) run through my trip photos and categorize them. It can OCR receipts and summarize spendings. It can answer simple questions, analyze code and ev…

Are there any harnesses that are attempting to optimize for using local models like this? Unsurprisingly, my naive attempts to integrate with harnesses designed for frontier models have gone poorly. But it seems like a harness that understands the capabilities and limitations better could perform significantly better.

Re: Local AI needs to be the norm

#615

I feel like lots of people here are just commenting on the headline. This isn't about the local models you're running on your old gaming rig, or the tesla p40 rig you build for local llm's. This is about code leveraging the local resources where the code is running for it's AI needs. Rather than making an API call to an external AI service, the code leverages the AI capabilities built into the hardware it runs on. Wi…

And this is exactly what the LLM provider industry is fighting tooth-and-nail. It’s not only because it doesn’t directly contribute to their bottom line, it also directly opposes the idea that LLMs are going to replace entire workers rather than enhance the abilities of individual workers. What we’re headed towards would have been a killer product and probably still shifted a bunch of capital to the bazillionaires ha…

mainframe industry vs personal computers.

If their product is "access to a big model running on a really big computer" (if we can count 'multiple data-centers' as a single enormous distributed computer), then the product "small, accessible device that everyone has" risks killing their cash cow.

Ironically enough, the first company to really focus on "an LLM in every phone" will have a good shot at actually being the ones that "changed everythingTM", in the way Microsoft changed the world from IBM mainframes to PCs, or Apple made smartphones a thing.

Re: Local AI needs to be the norm

#616
post #80

They will be, and that moment is not that far off. We've got the progression in place already: first, large data centers could have performant LLMs, we are now firmly in "a bunch of servers with a couple of H100s each" territory, slowly going into "128 GB VRAM on a MacBook Pro or a Strix Halo". Within the next year, the pattern of "expensive remote LLM for planning, local slow-but-faster-than-human LLM for execution"…

> how much of the current compute capacity craze will local hosting give the kiss of death to and what that means for the market.

Nvidia and other hardware sellers would love if they could sell a bunch of chips to individual consumers that would sit idle for 95% of its life.

Re: Local AI needs to be the norm

#617

Here's some things you can do right now with local models on a consumer device: - text-to-speech - speech-to-text - dictionary - encyclopedia - help troubleshooting errors - generate common recipes and nutritional facts - proofread emails, blog posts - search a large trove of documents, find information, summarize it (RAG) - manipulate your terminal/browser/etc - analyze a picture or video - generate a picture or vid…

Would you share your experience of the used models? I have quite some experience with the larger models but the smaller ones tend to loop around or just fail on their tasks...

It depends a lot on the specific task and specific model (and version (and quant..)). For example, Phi 4 mini is good for math and logic, and the reasoning version is surprisingly good at tool calling/RAG, but the family sucks at everything else. Gemma 4 and Qwen 3.5 are well known for having fantastic general-purpose models in the 4B-9B range, but at the lower end they actually suck again because it's just scaled down, and so will probably loop 50% of the time at the smallest sizes. For the very small (350M-1.2B), LiquidAI's LFM 2.5 uses novel techniques to eliminate doom loops, and they have a vision variant - but it's still a tiny model, so don't try to code with it. And when you just want basic tool calling, even "old" models like llama 3.2, gemma 2, qwen 2.5, are good, fast and low-memory. If you do more searching you can find specific models that are the best at specific tasks in a given size range.

For any model where you notice looping, tune the LLM settings. Reduce temperature and top_p, increase presence/frequency penalty, reduce context size. If you have a specific task to do, fine-tuning is the absolute best way to both reduce memory usage and boost performance and quality. Remember that tiny models are not designed for 0-shot/1-shot, they need lots of specific instruction and context in the prompt, with multi-shot prompts having a dramatic effect on output quality. Try to keep your prompt to specific tasks. Think of small models as children, SOTA models as experienced professionals, and middle-of-the-road models as an average adult; you give the bigger ones more responsibility/agency, but more rules and guardrails to the little ones.

For coding you do want the biggest model you can fit, so this is where larger RAM shines (32GB+ iGPU). If you can fit a dense model, do that. MoE is ok but will perform better on narrower tasks. Use the bleeding edge forks of llamacpp for turboquant/etc and Multi-Token Prediction.

The last thing is quants. If you're running something that isn't the bare model (like an unsloth dynamic quant), model performance is gonna suffer the smaller you go, and smaller models will be much more affected. So try to max out the amount of memory you can dedicate to the model, and pick larger quants like Q6/Q8. You can quant the k/v cache but that also may have a negative effect. And again, if you can fine-tune for a task, you will gain much more performance and quality and reduce memory.

Re: Local AI needs to be the norm

#618

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's here, right now. I mean I've been forcing my good old 1080ti to run local models since a short while after llama was first leaked. But I wouldn't say "local models are here" in the same way as "year of the Linux desktop!111" Until someone can just go out and buy some sort of "AI pod" that they can take home, plug in and hit one button on a mobile app to select a model (or even just hide models behind various pe…

What is the use case you see for non-technical users self-hosting? I think it’s important that tools remain available but I don’t expect it to be adopted by “average consumers.” I’m interested in self-hosting for privacy and control. I already owned the hardware I’m testing with, so my spend is limited to time and electricity. The “LLM pods” you describe will be loaded with spyware and adware (see: Smart TVs), and av…

Agree with your point on them being loaded up with spyware etc because that's just how it is now I suppose.

In terms of maximising compute I kind of agree but also kinda not - people's laptops and phones aren't burning at 100% 24/7 either. Sure AI requires so much more compute...but not _that_ much more, especially as technology marches on.

For the general use case; I could be wrong but I'd see it sort of like a GPU/NAS/etc. "Pay once" rather than a subscription (to a service offered by a datacenter).

But tbf, the way things are now _is_ all subscription models and consumers just kinda let it happen. I would love to be able to pay a one-off fee for lightroom...but I can't because they want a subscription to "pay for all the updating we're doing". They barely update shit.

Re: Local AI needs to be the norm

#619

I feel like lots of people here are just commenting on the headline. This isn't about the local models you're running on your old gaming rig, or the tesla p40 rig you build for local llm's. This is about code leveraging the local resources where the code is running for it's AI needs. Rather than making an API call to an external AI service, the code leverages the AI capabilities built into the hardware it runs on. Wi…

And this is exactly what the LLM provider industry is fighting tooth-and-nail. It’s not only because it doesn’t directly contribute to their bottom line, it also directly opposes the idea that LLMs are going to replace entire workers rather than enhance the abilities of individual workers. What we’re headed towards would have been a killer product and probably still shifted a bunch of capital to the bazillionaires ha…

As long as Apple and Google put reasonable AI capabilities on device, then software engineers will use those capabilities when it makes sense (the article gives lots of good examples of capabilities that make sense to run locally). As the author notes, it's cheaper and more reliable to run these things locally.

That also doesn't preclude LLM services from being massively successful, they'll just have to justify the pricing and complexity that comes with their adoption, just like any other product.

Re: Local AI needs to be the norm

#620

Every reply here forgets/overlooks the main reason for why this is not going to happen: The astronomical AI data center investments currently underway. Those place are not just for training. They are for inference too and the way all those investments are expected to eventually pay off. The whole AI sector of our industry depends on running models in these places.

These astronomical AI data centers will be used for high-value inference with smarter models that really are too large for running locally. The investments will be fine once they pivot to that use. Currently available open models are not in that range.

I don't buy that that will be a useful distinction.

First of all, no AI model will say "I'm too smart for this question, I suggest you use a cheaper one so I don't make unnecessary money for my owner" or "I'm too dumb, so instead of hallucinating I'll suggest you go to the cloud and ask my smarter sibling".

Second, there is no incentive in the market for tooling to evolve that way. There will be the illusion that some models will do that, similar to today (or maybe some harnesses rather) but nobody will willinglylet money sit on the table. These data centers are not being built to solve world hunger. They are built to ultimately hook you on more realistic fake bs youtube videos so you feel good while getting even more ads injected into your life.

Post reply on HN