Gemma 3 model overview: https://ai.google.dev/gemma/docs/core
Huggingface collection: https://huggingface.co/collections/google/gemma-3-release-67...
* the parent link is to storage.googleapis.com
* There's documentation on ai.google.dev
* The announcement blogpost is https://blog.google/technology/developers/gemma-3/
* you try it on https://aistudio.google.com/
It's helpful to have a top-level post like this, but can some PM please consolidate this into, IDK, ai.google.com/gemini?
* you download the weights at https://www.kaggle.com/models/google/gemma-3/
1) Discoverability
2) "System structure mirrors organization". I.E., it's an indicator of a fragmented and disorganized structure that's not likely to produce cohesive product results.
You listed:
- one static pdf file stored on a CDN
- one company blog static website
- one developer documentation static website
- one interactive product URL
As much as I like to dunk on how messy things can be at Google I don't think this is a really good example. Apart from small startups I would be scared if you served all of them from the same base host.
[0] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/mar/08/we-defini...
Conway's Law is the general term for this concept https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_law
I assure you gemma 3 works fine in LM studio. Gguf and MLx are available.
Since you're not using the official models (since they're not GGUFs), what exact model are you trying to use? The 3rd party you rely on might have screwed something up.
Needs an ollama newer than 0.5.11. Probably the very-recently-released v0.6.0[1]:
> New Model:
> * Gemma 3: Google Gemma 3 model is now available in 1B, 4B, 12B, and 27B parameter sizes.
What exactly is this supposed to mean? That I can grab the weights by just downloading them, or something like that?
Because when I open up the HuggingFace repository, it asks me to "accept the conditions" (Google’s usage license). How is this different from any other proprietary binaries people distribute on the internet but let you run locally? Are other software (like 1Password for example) also "open software" because you can download it?
> By using, reproducing, modifying, distributing, performing or displaying any portion or element of Gemma, Model Derivatives including via any Hosted Service, (each as defined below) (collectively, the "Gemma Services") or otherwise accepting the terms of this Agreement, you agree to be bound by this Agreement.
https://ai.google.dev/gemma/terms
Worth knowing if you're planning to use this model for production usage/with a business.
So once again, I don't understand what "open" is supposed to mean when they call models like these "open weights". What part exactly is "open"?
There's no doubt Gemma's license is less permissive than other models and that it has less community finetuners for that reason.
Here's OSI's argument about this when Meta's llama put such limitations in their license: https://opensource.org/blog/metas-llama-2-license-is-not-ope...