Hacker News Reader

Comment by btown | Hacker News Reader

As https://twitter.com/QuinnyPig/status/1729558866520658376 notes:

> Amazon Q is launching in preview for only $20 a month per user with a 10 user minimum. The road to "Go build!" increasingly has a tollbooth.

View on HN

I'll take a tollbooth over something passive like ad injection every single day of the week.

is that guaranteed?

The tollbooth? I would imagine so unless until the compute cost comes down and the hardware becomes more accessible/integrated at the consumer level.

If you mean my preference for subscription over ads, that is guaranteed. I'm fine with an ad model for consuming content (like watching YouTube) but never with content generation (like using Photoshop).

Plus, I really like these technologies and want to see them go further and I'm more than happy to pay for my product when the deal is good, which AI costs currently are relative to the hardware cost. Having to pay for these services + having big tech compete with each other for the best cutting edge release = a lot of money, time, and focus in that area to win the consumers on the merits of their products, whether that consumer is an enterprise customer or not.

I don't see this kind of competition in any most other marketplaces for content generation tools, that's partially by virtue of AI being new tech but also because the race for dominating the AI marketplace has only just begun.

I mean , is it certain that advertising won't be injected?

Would've been nice to see per request pricing as an option too.

does quinn want companies to run large, expensive servers to do inference with no compensation? half the reason you're using services is because the hardware to do it locally isn't cheap. idk why he's kvetching about this when you also have to pay to host a web site, run a compute workload, whatever. but "muh bigcorp bad" ig

Given amazon's reputation, as a geek I'm not going to build anything on this. Or bard. Even if it's free.

Open ai has the benefit of having a fresh track record.

> Given amazon's reputation, as a geek I'm not going to build anything on this. Or bard.

Bard is not Amazon's, which you may know but your comment implies is part of Amazon's portfolio. Bard is a Google product.

Amazon, however, has a better track record compared to Google with respect to keeping services around. The main issues will be around cost effectiveness (versus self-hosting or alternate services).

I was of the opposite opinion--does OpenAI's paid services prevent your queries and data from being used internally?

Yes

What reputation are you referencing?

Maybe third-parties commingle their counterfeit knockoff AI models with Q in the fulfillment centers, and when you boot it up you have a chance of getting one of those instead of the real AI model you wanted (even though you made sure you selected the one that was "sold by and ships from amazon.com").

I am kidding. AWS has a reputation of being expensive and complicated, that's about it.

Of course he said even if its free so probably not what he was referencing?

Surely, you must be aware that Microsoft, who now runs OpenAI has a bit of a history of Embrace, Extend, Exterminate?

Building on top of any of these platforms provided by trillion dollar companies is a sucker's game. The moment they decided your business looks tasty, they'll eat your lunch.

> Building on top of any of these platforms provided by trillion dollar companies is a sucker's game.

Until local models reach the fidelity and speed that these megacorps offer, what choice does anyone actually have with respect to AI? I was under the impression that even if you get over the initial cost of hardware to achieve speed, the fidelity of your outputs would still be of a lower overall quality relative to GPT/Claude/Bard(maybe?). I could be 100% wrong though.

The gap is closing. I'm finding goliath-120b does better than chat gpt 3.5

Nothing comes close to gpt4 though

For me, the gap between 3.5 and 4 is massive. If I'm stuck between using 3.5 and doing the work myself, more often than not, I'm choosing to do it myself. Not to imply 3.5 is unusable, its just my bar for minimum fidelity is closer to 4 than 3.5 with respect to tasks that I'm comfortable offloading onto an AI.

What are you running goliath-120b on? Is it costly to run all day every day? How long does it take to complete an output? I've thought about building a multi GPU node for local LLMs but I always decide against it on the premise that the tech is so new I figure in the next 3-4 years we'll see specialized hardware combined with efficiency improvements that would make my node obsolete.

I run it on 2xRTX3090. I bought them used (probably ex-miners).

> I always decide against it on the premise that the tech is so new I figure in the next 3-4 years we'll see specialized hardware combined with efficiency improvements that would make my node obsolete.

You're probably right, this happened back in the day with bitcoin mining.

How does Goliath-120b improve on llama2-70b by just combining two of them?

https://huggingface.co/alpindale/goliath-120b?text=Hi.

> An auto-regressive causal LM created by combining 2x finetuned Llama-2 70B into one.

I.. don't know. Even the creator of the model doesn't know why it worked out so well.

It really is better (at reasoning) than the 70b models when I use it. Though some people reported that it makes spelling mistakes.

P.S. This doesn't always work out well, people have tried swapping different layers randomly and it makes the models incoherent.

Ummmm

Reply on news.ycombinator.com