The White House on why Mark Zuckerberg wasn’t invited to its A.I. summit | Hacker News Reader

The White House on why Mark Zuckerberg wasn’t invited to its A.I. summit

fortune.com

12 pointsRafelMri17 comments

A better question would why the orgs actually working on solutions weren’t invited, instead of just the ones profitting from the problems.

Its like having a workers rights summit and inviting a handful of big employers and no one from labor, or an environmental summit with a handpicked elite group of polluters.

It would be a mistake to rule out Meta in the AI race, all because of the current LLM chatbot hype, the same reason why almost no-one bought its stock when it was send to less than $90. Now it is up over 110%.

You wouldn't get a flurry of open source LLMs everywhere had it not been for LLaMa by Meta.

Except that the LLaMa model public release was involuntary (except for the research carveout); So, I am hesitant to give Meta credit for that while as they are also issuing takedowns.

Nevertheless, they are doing fundamental AI work. We can give them that.

Credit for the LLaMa derivatives (Alpaca, Vicuna etc) or for the base model? I don't see why they wouldn't deserve credit for the base model.

No dispute on crediting Meta for LLaMa itself.

I dispute crediting Meta for the widespread interest in LLMs. IMO, that would be Google (for Transformers, BERT), OpenAI (for GPT-2, GPT-3). BERT and GPT-2 were released under Apache 2.0 and MIT licenses respectively and precede the release of LLaMa.

Of course, we can credit ChatGPT for bringing it to the forefront of public consciousness.

And none of this takes away from Meta's work on LLaMa. I had said as much in my original comment.

Those who were invited:

Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI

Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic

Satya Nadella, Chairman and CEO of Microsoft

Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google and Alphabet

"Only firms ‘currently leading in the space’ wanted..."

I guess that explains why Amazon wasn't invited either.

I also might have included Salesforce, LAION/Eleuther.AI, Stability and Midjourney. All of them seem to be contributing greatly to the progress that the White House is concerned about.

LAION isnt a U.S. company

That's fair, I see that it is German. "EleutherAI Institute" is technically founded in NYC, but with diverse European/cosmopolitan roots and leadership.

Interesting that the leaked memo from Google on the front page of HN credited the release of LLaMA as the impetus to the open source community advancements in language learning outpacing any possible closed-source moat they could have.

It seems the White House, regardless of who's in office, likes to snub the current technology leaders in a space, like when Musk wasn't invited to talk about electric cars and automobiles.

I'm not sure who would be a leader in the ML/AI space at Meta. Last I checked Zuck was busy with Meta's Mii fascination. Google, OpenAI, Microsoft all have products in this space and Anthropic is doing AI security and safety work.

Is there any info which who at Meta actually worked on LLaMA? (department, team, persons, etc)

Maybe they're still sore from the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Ana...

The author of the article couldn't be bothered to proofread the first two sentences, and apparently the CEO mentioned $30 during a presentation, WOW!

Maybe next year.

Poor Mark...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com