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

Meta Llama 3

llama.meta.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

731–740 of 965 posts

Re: Meta Llama 3

#731

Post by [deleted] »

llm_trw wrote: post #714
glenstein wrote: post #574

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right because the very little I've heard out of Sam Altman this year hinting at future updates suggests that there's something coming before we turn our calendars to 2025. So equaling or mildly exceeding GPT-4 will certainly be welcome, but could amount to a temporary stint as king of the mountain.

This is always the case. But the fact that open models are beating state of the art from 6 months ago is really telling just how little moat there is around AI.

[deleted]

Re: Meta Llama 3

#732

Post by mvkel »

nickthegreek wrote: post #17
bbig wrote: post #4

They've got a console for it as well, https://www.meta.ai/ And announcing a lot of integration across the Meta product suite, https://about.fb.com/news/2024/04/meta-ai-assistant-built-wi... Neglected to include comparisons against GPT-4-Turbo or Claude Opus, so I guess it's far from being a frontier model. We'll see how it fares in the LLM Arena.

And they even allow you to use it without logging in. Didnt expect that from Meta.

1. Free rlhf 2. They cookie the hell out of you to breadcrumb your journey around the web.

They don't need you to login to get what they need, much like Google

Re: Meta Llama 3

#734

Post by mvkel »

viraptor wrote: post #579
hanspeter wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's because of regulations! The same reason that Threads was launched with a delay in EU. It simply takes a lot of work to comply with EU regulations, and by no surprise will we see these launches happen outside of EU first.

It's trivial to comply with EU privacy regulation if you're not depending on selling customer data. But if you say "It's because of regulations!" I hope you have a source to back that up.

That won't be true for much longer.

The AI Act will significantly nerf the capabilities you will be allowed to benefit from in the eu.

Re: Meta Llama 3

#735

Post by latentsea »

stubish wrote: post #608
iorrus wrote: post #555

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let’s be honest VR is about the porn. I’d it’s successful at that Zuck will make his billions.

The computer game and television/movie industries both dwarf adult entertainment. The reasons for the rationale on how pornography made the VCR and VHS in particular a success (bringing affordable video pornography into the privacy of your home) do not apply to VR.

Not gonna lie though, VR is way better for porn than VHS.

Re: Meta Llama 3

#736

Post by amitport »

blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #422
mananaysiempre wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really that either, if we assume that “open weight” means something similar to the standard meaning of “open source”—section 2 of the license discriminates against some users, and the entirety of the AUP against some uses, in contravention of FSD #0 (“The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose”) as well as DFSG #5&6 = OSD #5&6 (“No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups” and “... Fields of Ende…

Those are all great points and these companies need to really be called out for open washing

It's a good balance IMHO. I appreciate what they have released.

Re: Meta Llama 3

#737

Post by tmalsburg2 »

dlandau wrote: post #703
asadotzler wrote: post #675

Earlier quoted context omitted.

50 billion dollars and fewer than 10 million MAU. That's a massive failure.

A chunky portion of those dollars were spent on buying and pre-ordering GPUs that were used to train and serve LLaMa

Yes, he got incredibly lucky that he found an alternative use for his GPU investment.

Re: Meta Llama 3

#738

Post by MeImCounting »

llm_trw wrote: post #717
eigenvalue wrote: post #591

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe at 1 or 2 bits of quantization! Even the Macs with the most unified RAM are maxxed out with much smaller models than 405b (especially since it's a dense model and not a MOE).

You can build a $6,000 machine with 12 channels DDR5 memory that's big enough to hold an 8bit quantized model. The generation speed is abysmal of course. Anything better than that starts at 200k per machine and goes up from there. Not something you can run at home, but definitely within the budget of most medium sized firms to buy one.

You can build a machine that can run 70b models at great TpS speeds for around 30-60k. That same machine could almost certainly run a 400b model with "useable" speeds. Obviously much slower than current ChatGPT speeds but still, that kind of machine is well within the means of wealthy hobbyists/highly compensated SWEs and small firms.

Re: Meta Llama 3

#739

Post by eggdaft »

mvkel wrote: post #732
nickthegreek wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And they even allow you to use it without logging in. Didnt expect that from Meta.

1. Free rlhf 2. They cookie the hell out of you to breadcrumb your journey around the web. They don't need you to login to get what they need, much like Google

Do they really need “free RLHF”? As I understand it, RLHF needs relatively little data to work and its quality matters - I would expect paid and trained labellers to do a much better job than Joey Keyboard clicking past a “which helped you more” prompt whilst trying to generate an email.

Re: Meta Llama 3

#740

Post by ben_w »

visarga wrote: post #449
ben_w wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Once everyone can do it, then OpenAI value would evaporate. If you take OpenAI's charter statement seriously, the tech will make most humans' (economic) value evaporate for the same reason. https://openai.com/charter

> will make most humans' (economic) value evaporate for the same reason With one hand it takes, with the other it gives - AI will be in everyone's pocket, and super-human level capable of serving our needs; the thing is, you can't copy a billion dollars, but you can copy a LLaMA.

> OpenAI’s mission is to ensure that artificial general intelligence (AGI)—by which we mean highly autonomous systems that outperform humans at most economically valuable work—benefits all of humanity. We will attempt to directly build safe and beneficial AGI, but will also consider our mission fulfilled if our work aids others to achieve this outcome.

No current LLM is that, and Transformers may always be too sample-expensive for that.

But if anyone does make such a thing, OpenAI won't mind… so long as the AI is "safe" (whatever that means).

OpenAI has been totally consistent with saying that safety includes assuming weights are harmful until proven safe because you cannot un-release a harmful model; Other researchers say the opposite, on the grounds that white-box research is safety research is easier and more consistent.

I lean towards the former, not because I fear LLMs specifically, but because the irreversibly and the fact we don't know how close or far we are means it's a habit we should turn into a norm before it's urgent.

Post reply on HN