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

Open source AI is the path forward

about.fb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

641–650 of 936 posts

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#641

Post by m3kw9 »

baby wrote: post #380
light_triad wrote: post #354

They are positioning themselves as champions of AI open source mostly because they were blindsided by OpenAI, are not in the infra game, and want to commoditize their complements as much as possible. This is not altruism although it's still great for devs and startups. All FB GPU investments is primarily for new AI products "friends", recommendations and selling ads. https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy…

Meta does a good thing HN spends a day figuring out how it’s actually bad

So you think FB did this with zero benefit to themselves? They did open source so people could improve their models and eventually have a paid tier later either from hosting services or other strategies

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#642

Post by ofou » 

                Llama 3 Training System
                 Total: 19.2 exaFLOPS
                         |
            +-------------+-------------+
            |                           |
      Cluster 1               Cluster 2
    9.6 exaFLOPS             9.6 exaFLOPS
           |                       |
    +------+------+         +------+------+
    |             |         |             |
 12K GPUs      12K GPUs  12K GPUs      12K GPUs
    |             |         |             |
  [####]       [####]     [####]       [####]
  400+          400+      400+          400+
 TFLOPS/GPU   TFLOPS/GPU TFLOPS/GPU   TFLOPS/GPU

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#643

Post by koolala »

Spivak wrote: post #613
seoulmetro wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah.. and Facebook said they would enforce censorship on their platforms to ensure content safety.. that didn't turn out so well. Now it just censors anything remotely controversial, such as World War 2 historical facts or even just slightly offensive wording.

You're really just arguing about the tuning. I get that it's annoying as a user but as a moderator going into it with the mentality that any post is expendable and bringing down the banhammer on everything near the line keeps things civil. HN does that too with the no flame-bait rule.

Censorship isn't moderation.

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#644

Post by Zuiii »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #571
meowtimemania wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would openai/anthropic's approach be more safe? Are people able to remove all the guard rails on the llama models?

Yes, it's trivial to remove guardrails from any open access model: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/jGuXSZgv6qfdhMCuJ/refusal-in... https://huggingface.co/failspy/Llama-3-70B-Instruct-ablitera...

Humanity is so fortunate this "guardrails" mentality didn't catch on when we started publishing books. While too close for comfort, we got twice lucky that computing wasn't hampered by this mentality either.

This time, humanity narrowly averted complete disaster thanks to the huge efforts and resources of a small number of people.

I wonder if we are witnessing humanity's the end of open knowledge and compute (at least until we pass through a neo dark ages and reach the next age of enlightenment).

Whether it'll be due to profit or control, it looks like humanity is posed to get fucked.

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#645

Post by Zuiii »

endorphine wrote: post #605
Spivak wrote: post #585

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can't open source Linux because bad people might run servers? Can you imagine the disinformation they could spread with those? With enough of them you could have a massively global site made entirely for spreading it. God what if such a thing got into the hands of an egocentric billionaire?

An operating system is not "generative", hence it's not a force multiplier.

I don't understand. A bad actor can use a linux server to automatically run botnets and exploit new devices. How is that not a force multiplier?

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#646

Post by xvector »

Zuiii wrote: post #644
Der_Einzige wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it's trivial to remove guardrails from any open access model: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/jGuXSZgv6qfdhMCuJ/refusal-in... https://huggingface.co/failspy/Llama-3-70B-Instruct-ablitera...

Humanity is so fortunate this "guardrails" mentality didn't catch on when we started publishing books. While too close for comfort, we got twice lucky that computing wasn't hampered by this mentality either. This time, humanity narrowly averted complete disaster thanks to the huge efforts and resources of a small number of people. I wonder if we are witnessing humanity's the end of open knowledge and compute (at leas…

[flagged]

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#647

Post by xvector »

mupuff1234 wrote: post #580
whitepaint wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone is aware of that. No one thinks Facebook or Mark are some saint entities. But while the spider is doing some good deeds why not just go "yeah! go spider!". Once it becomes an asshole, we will kill it. People are not dumb.

It's not even truly open source, they set a user limit.

I'm not particularly concerned about the user limit. The companies for which those limits will matter are so large that they should consider contributing back to humanity by developing their own SOTA foundation models.

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#648

Post by tomjen3 »

Re safety: Just release two models, one that has been tuned and one that hasn't.

Claude is supposed to be better, but it is also even more locked down than ChatGPT.

Word will let me write a manifest for a new Nazi party, but Claude is so locked down that it won't find a cartoon in a picture and Gemini... well.

If AIs are not to harm society, they need to enable us to think in new ways.

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#649

Post by seoulmetro »

Spivak wrote: post #613
seoulmetro wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah.. and Facebook said they would enforce censorship on their platforms to ensure content safety.. that didn't turn out so well. Now it just censors anything remotely controversial, such as World War 2 historical facts or even just slightly offensive wording.

You're really just arguing about the tuning. I get that it's annoying as a user but as a moderator going into it with the mentality that any post is expendable and bringing down the banhammer on everything near the line keeps things civil. HN does that too with the no flame-bait rule.

HN moderation is quite poor and very subjective. The guidelines are not the site rules, the rules are made up on the spot.

HN censors too. Facebook just does it automatically on a huge scale with no reasoning behind each censor.

Censorship is just tuning people or things you don't want out. Censorship of your own content as a user is extremely annoying and Facebook's censorhsip is quite unethical. It doesn't help safety of the users, it helps safety of the business.

Also Facebook censors things that are not objectively not offensive in lots of instances. YouTube too. Safety for their brand.

Re: Open source AI is the path forward

#650

Post by Flimm »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #568
MaxBarraclough wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't helpful. The community defers to the OSI's definition because it captures what they care about. We've seen people try to deceptively describe non-OSS projects as open source, and no doubt we will continue to see it. Thankfully the community (including Hacker News) is quick to call it out, and to insist on not cheapening the term. This is one the topics that just keeps turning up: * https://news.ycombinator…

This isn't helpful. The community... Speak for yourself, please. The term is much older than 1998, with one easily-Googled example being https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/DOC_0000639879.pdf , and an explicit case of IT-related usage being https://i.imgur.com/Nw4is6s.png from https://www.google.com/books/edition/InfoWarCon/09X3Ove9uKgC... . Unless a registered trademark is involved (spoiler: it's not) no one, wheth…

Neither of those usages relate to IT, they both are about sources of intelligence (espionage). Even if they were, the OSI definition won, nobody is using the definitions from 1995 CIA or the 1996 InfoConWar book in the realm of IT, not even Facebook.

The community has the authority to complain about companies mis-labelling their pork products as vegan, even if nobody has a registered trademark on the term vegan. Would you tell people to shut up about that case because they don't have a registered trademark? Likewise, the community has authority to complain about Meta/Facebook mis-labelling code as open source even when they put restrictions on usage. It's not gate-keeping or dictatorship to complain about being misled or being lied to.

Post reply on HN