Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> a privacy-aware secure LLM Funniest thing I've heard all month.
Do read through the linked article. Not sure how you could make cloud compute more private if you tried; apart from homomorphic encryption.
Open source AI is the path forward
911–920 of 936 posts
Re: Open source AI is the path forward
#912Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If Facebook can't release data it trains on because it would compromise user privacy, it is already a significant privacy violation that should be a scandal Thousands of entities would scramble to sue Facebook over any released dataset no matter what the privacy implications of the dataset are. It's just not worth it in any world. I believe you are not thinking of this problem from the view of the PM or VPs that wo…
> I feel the world is too hostile to big tech Lmao what? If the world were sane and hostile to big tech, we would've nuked them all years ago for all the bullshit they pulled and continue to pull. Big tech has politicians in their pockets, but thankfully the "populist techno-pessimist" (read: normal people who are sick of billionaires exploiting the entire planet) are finally starting to turn their opinions, albeit s…
> normal people who are sick of billionaires exploiting the entire planet
Don't understand what big tech does for humanity and how much they rely on it in the day to day. Literally all of their modern conveniences are enabled by big tech.
Re: Open source AI is the path forward
#913Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I feel the world is too hostile to big tech Lmao what? If the world were sane and hostile to big tech, we would've nuked them all years ago for all the bullshit they pulled and continue to pull. Big tech has politicians in their pockets, but thankfully the "populist techno-pessimist" (read: normal people who are sick of billionaires exploiting the entire planet) are finally starting to turn their opinions, albeit s…
> normal people who are sick of billionaires exploiting the entire planet Don't understand what big tech does for humanity and how much they rely on it in the day to day. Literally all of their modern conveniences are enabled by big tech.
Rather dismissive particularly as Crowdstrike has laid a good chunk of that bare.
In my experience many 'normal people' understand far more than you deign credit, many are able to forgo modern 'conveniences' if pressed.
Re: Open source AI is the path forward
#914Earlier quoted context omitted.
The comment history does read much like you'd expect from a bot, lots of short, generic statements that vaguely tie to the subject of the post
There was no need to scroll through my history and analyze it. Your analysis is mistaken. I'm not a bot. Sometimes my comments are brief because I'm trying to be concise. I don't just express my agreement with a simple 'I agree', but respond in a more detailed manner yet also shortly.
They're brief but they also sound so bot-ish in the way they're written, I'm not the only one to have pointed that out in the thread
Re: Open source AI is the path forward
#915Earlier quoted context omitted.
There was no need to scroll through my history and analyze it. Your analysis is mistaken. I'm not a bot. Sometimes my comments are brief because I'm trying to be concise. I don't just express my agreement with a simple 'I agree', but respond in a more detailed manner yet also shortly.
They're brief but they also sound so bot-ish in the way they're written, I'm not the only one to have pointed that out in the thread
Yes, there are four of you here. And this is the first time I’ve encountered something like this. I hope I won’t trouble you with my answers anymore!
Re: Open source AI is the path forward
#916Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're brief but they also sound so bot-ish in the way they're written, I'm not the only one to have pointed that out in the thread
Yes, there are four of you here. And this is the first time I’ve encountered something like this. I hope I won’t trouble you with my answers anymore!
No trouble, you just have a different writing style!
Re: Open source AI is the path forward
#917Earlier quoted context omitted.
> normal people who are sick of billionaires exploiting the entire planet Don't understand what big tech does for humanity and how much they rely on it in the day to day. Literally all of their modern conveniences are enabled by big tech.
Rather dismissive particularly as Crowdstrike has laid a good chunk of that bare. In my experience many 'normal people' understand far more than you deign credit, many are able to forgo modern 'conveniences' if pressed.
Crowdstrike merely shows how much people depend on big tech and they don't even realize how much they rely on it.
I think you have too much faith in the average person. They scarcely understand how nearly everything in their life has been manufactured on or designed on something powered by big tech.
Re: Open source AI is the path forward
#918Earlier quoted context omitted.
You also can't use it for training or improving other models. You also can't use it if you're the government of India. Neither can sex workers use it. (Do you know if your customers are sex workers?) There are also very vague restrictions for things like discrimination, racism etc.
> You also can't use it if you're the government of India. Why is that?
I'm also very curious. On the other hand I don't want governments touching AI models either
Re: Open source AI is the path forward
#919Earlier quoted context omitted.
Calling weights an executable is disingenuous and not a serious discussion. You can do a lot more with weights than you could with a binary executable.
You can do a lot more with an executable as well than just execute it. So maybe the analogy is apt, even if not exact. Actually executables you can reverse engineer it into something that could be compiled back into an executable with the exact same functionality, which is AFAIK impossible to do with "open weights". Still, we don't call free executables "open source".
Its not really an analogy. LLMs are quite literally executables in the same way that jpegs are executables. They both specify machine readable (but not human readable) domain specific instructions executed by the image viewer/inference harness.
And yes, like other executables, they are not literal black boxes. Rather, they provide machine readable specifications which are not human readable without immense effort.
For an LLM to be open source there would need to be source code. Source code, btw, is not just a procedure that can be handed to a machine to produce code that can be executed by the machine. That means the training data and code is not sufficient (or necessary) for an open source model.
What we need for an open source model is a human readable specification of the model's functionality and data structures which allows the user to modify specific arbitrary functionally/structure, and can be used to produce an executable (the model weights).
We simply need much stronger interpretability for that to be possible.
Re: Open source AI is the path forward
#920Earlier quoted context omitted.
Overall government doing anything is a bad idea. There are cases however where government is the only entity that can do certain things. These are things that involve military, law enforcement etc. Outside of this we should rely on private industry and for-profit industry as much as possible.
To summarise: There are some things where government action is the best solution, however by default see if the private sector can sort it first.
And it has been demonstrated long ago that the private market is not the most efficient solution for the general society for handling healthcare insurance.