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

911–920 of 965 posts

Re: Meta Llama 3

#911

Post by courseofaction »

eigenvalue wrote: post #248
paxys wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can see from Zuck's interviews that he is still an engineer at heart. Every other big tech company has lost that kind of leadership.

For sure. I just started watching the new Dwarkesh interview with Zuck that was just released ( https://t.co/f4h7ko0M7q ) and you can just tell from the first few minutes that he simply has a different level of enthusiasm and passion and level of engagement than 99% of big tech CEOs.

Who cares, listen to what he says.

38:30 Zuckerberg states that they won't release models once they're sufficiently powerful.

It's OpenAI again, facebook has burnt all customer trust for years and the fact they changed their name to "Meta" actually worked.

Re: Meta Llama 3

#912

Post by [deleted] »

acchow wrote: post #755
eigenvalue wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For sure. I just started watching the new Dwarkesh interview with Zuck that was just released ( https://t.co/f4h7ko0M7q ) and you can just tell from the first few minutes that he simply has a different level of enthusiasm and passion and level of engagement than 99% of big tech CEOs.

I've never heard of this person, but many of the questions he asks Zuck show a total lack of any insight in this field. How did this interview even happen?

[deleted]

Re: Meta Llama 3

#913

Post by xpe »

lannisterstark wrote: post #846
xpe wrote: post #681

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but also to not use pessimistic AI "doomerism" as an excuse to hide the crown jewels and put it behind a centralized API with a gatekeeper because of "AI safety risks." AI safety risk is substantial. It is also testable. (There are prediction markets on it, for example.) Of course, some companies may latch onto various valid arguments for insincere reasons. I'd challenge everyone to closely compare ideas such as "o…

I too like making up hypothetical insane scenarios in my head. The difference is that they stay with me in the shower.

Was this meant as an insult? That is a plausible reading of what you wrote. There’s no need to be disparaging. It hurts yourself and others too.

I welcome substantive discussion. Consider this:

https://openai.com/research/building-an-early-warning-system...

Re: Meta Llama 3

#914

Post by xpe »

lannisterstark wrote: post #846
xpe wrote: post #681

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but also to not use pessimistic AI "doomerism" as an excuse to hide the crown jewels and put it behind a centralized API with a gatekeeper because of "AI safety risks." AI safety risk is substantial. It is also testable. (There are prediction markets on it, for example.) Of course, some companies may latch onto various valid arguments for insincere reasons. I'd challenge everyone to closely compare ideas such as "o…

I too like making up hypothetical insane scenarios in my head. The difference is that they stay with me in the shower.

You did not respond to the crux of my argument: The dynamics between offensive and defensive technology. Have you thought about it? What do you think is rational to conclude?

Re: Meta Llama 3

#915

Post by waffletower »

wiz21c wrote: post #772
CuriouslyC wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They didn't compare against the best models because they were trying to do "in class" comparisons, and the 70B model is in the same class as Sonnet (which they do compare against) and GPT3.5 (which is much worse than sonnet). If they're beating sonnet that means they're going to be within stabbing distance of opus and gpt4 for most tasks, with the only major difference probably arising in extremely difficult reasonin…

"within stabbing distance" dunno if english is your mother tongue, but this sounds really good (although a tad aggressive :-) )) !

As Mike Judge's historical documents show, this enhanced aggression will seem normal in a few years or even months.

Re: Meta Llama 3

#916

Post by season2episode3 »

vineyardmike wrote: post #774
LrnByTeach wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Losers & Winners from Llama-3-400B Matching 'Claude 3 Opus' etc.. Losers: - Nvidia Stock : lid on GPU growth in the coming year or two as "Nation states" use Llama-3/Llama-4 instead spending $$$ on GPU for own models, same goes with big corporations. - OpenAI & Sam: hard to raise speculated $100 Billion, Given GPT-4/GPT-5 advances are visible now. - Google : diminished AI superiority posture Winners: - AMD, intel: th…

I also disagree on Google... Google's business is largely not predicated on AI the way everyone else is. Sure they hope it's a driver of growth, but if the entire LLM industry disappeared, they'd be fine. Google doesn't need AI "Superiority", they need "good enough" to prevent the masses from product switching. If the entire world is saturated in AI, then it no longer becomes a differentiator to drive switching. And…

Google’s play is not really in AI imo, it’s in the the fact that their custom silicon allows them to run models cheaply.

Models are pretty much fungible at this point if you’re not trying to do any LoRAs or fine tunes.

Re: Meta Llama 3

#917

Post by phkahler »

drcode wrote: post #872
LrnByTeach wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Losers & Winners from Llama-3-400B Matching 'Claude 3 Opus' etc.. Losers: - Nvidia Stock : lid on GPU growth in the coming year or two as "Nation states" use Llama-3/Llama-4 instead spending $$$ on GPU for own models, same goes with big corporations. - OpenAI & Sam: hard to raise speculated $100 Billion, Given GPT-4/GPT-5 advances are visible now. - Google : diminished AI superiority posture Winners: - AMD, intel: th…

The memory chip companies were done for, once Bill Gates figured out no one would ever need more than 64K of memory

Right. We all need 192 or 256GB to locally run these ~70B models, and 1TB to run a 400B.

Re: Meta Llama 3

#918

Post by drngdds »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #482
bearjaws wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like Lex has gone full 'both sides' at this point, waiting for him to have Alex Jones on at this point. There is no real commentary to pull from his interviews, at best you get some interesting stories but not the truth.

That is a strength, not a weakness. It's valuable to see why people, even those with whom we disagree, think the way they do. There's already far too much of a tendency to expel heretics in today's society, so the fact that Lex just patiently listens to people is a breath of fresh air.

How? It's fine to have on people with all different viewpoints, including awful ones, but I think pushing back when they're on some bullshit is good and necessary. Otherwise you're just uncritically spreading fake junk to a huge audience, which leads to more people believing in fake junk.

Re: Meta Llama 3

#920

Post by octodog »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #329
mrtranscendence wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know Dwarkesh but I despise Lex Fridman. I don't know how a man that lacks the barest modicum of charisma has propelled himself to helming a high-profile, successful podcast. It's not like he tends to express interesting or original thoughts to make up for his paucity of presence. It's bizarre. Maybe I'll check out Dwarkesh, but even seeing him mentioned him in the same breath as Fridman gives me pause ...

The question you should ask is: why are high-profile guests willing to talk to Lex Fridman but not others? The short answer, imho, is trust. No one gets turned into an embarrassing soundbite talking to Lex. He doesn't try to ask gotcha questions for clickbait articles. Generally speaking "the press" are not your friend and they will twist your words. You have to walk on egg shells. Lex doesn't need to express origina…

Yes, of course. His guests love being able to come on and present their view with very little critical analysis of what they are saying. It is fantastic PR for them.

Interviewers shouldn't be aggressive, antagonistic or clickbaity but they should put opposing views to their guests so that the guest can respond. Testing ideas like this is a fundamental way of learning and establishing an understanding of a topic.

Post reply on HN