74 karma · joined December 5, 2022
I love open source but their very nature suggests there is no one open source model that will have the critical mass to just be a straight in replacement for ChatGPT and its UI.
I use Ollama and choose models and they are close to GPT-4 but OpenAI is speeding up into making a useful chat product. All the rest are foundational model demos.
This GPT-4o model is a classic example. It is essentially the same model as GPT-4 but these multimodal features, voice conversations, math, and speed is revolutionary as the creation of the model itself.
Open Source LLM will end up as a model in GitHub and will be used by developers but it looks like even if GPT-4o is only 3 months ahead of other models in terms of benchmarks, the UI + Usecase + Model is 2 years ahead of the competition. And I say that because there is still no chat product that is close to what ChatGPT is delivering now, even though there are models that is close to ChatGPT 4o today.
So if it is sticky for 2 more years, their lead will just grow and we will just end up with more open source models that are technically behind by 3 months but behind product-wise by 2 years.
This is the power of the model where you can own the whole stack and build a product. Open Source will focus on LLM benchmarks since that is the only way foundational models can differentiate themselves, but it does not mean it is a path to a great user experience.
So Open Source models like Llama will be here to stay, but it feels more like if you want to build a compelling product, you have to own and control your own model.
If we care about the results, and the model showed an Asian and Black Nazi, then we know it is not really about the results.
It remains to be seen. OpenAI’s models are barely leading Gemini Ultra now, but as chat product it is still miles ahead of the Gemini interface.
https://www.riaa.com/u-s-sales-database/
At its peak, Inflation adjusted Vinyl Sales was $1.4billion in 1979. Then forward to the lowest sales in 2009 at $3.4million. So Vinyl has been so popular it grew to $8.5m by 2021.
That is just nostalgia, not cultural change pushed by the dystopia of AI.
Hollywood is already destroyed. It is not the powerful entity it once was.
In terms of attention and time of entertainment, Youtube has already surpassed them.
This will create a multitude more YouTube creators that do not care about getting this right or making a living out of it. It will just take our attention all the same, away from the traditional Hollywood.
Yes there will still be great films and franchises, the industry is shrinking.
This is similar with Journalism saying that AI will destroy it. Well there was nothing to destroy because the a bunch of traditional newspapers already closed shop even before AI came.
Google appears to be making strides in catching up.
When it comes to my personal workflow and accomplishing tasks, I still find ChatGPT to be the most effective tool. My familiarity with its features has made it indispensable. The integration of mentions and tailored GPTs seamlessly enhances my workflow.
While Gemini may match the foundational capabilities of LLMs, it falls short in delivering a product that efficiently aids in task completion.
Specifically, Gemini's tendency to structure responses with bullet points and headings from the start doesn't appeal to me. It feels more like receiving an essay in response to a simple question, whereas ChatGPT's responses facilitate a flowing conversation. Gemini aims to provide exhaustive answers, which can be overwhelming when I'm interested in a more open-ended dialogue that smoothly transitions between topics. In essence, Gemini Advanced focuses on delivering detailed answers without allowing much time for reflection.
Therefore, when it comes to preference in RLHF (Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback) chatbots, ChatGPT-4 is my favorite for its ability to better engage in the type of conversational dynamics I prefer.
Gemini integration with Google's apps will compete with Microsoft's app on integration.
And the condition for Gemini to win: Google has to go all-in. and that means creating an AI that will eventually phase out their cash-cow Google Search. Microsoft and OpenAI does not have that kind of internal conflict.
It really is Google's to lose this AI race from now on. - We have heard this so many times and it seems like they are always getting behind by the day.
I think the paper addressed this but what we consider risky play now is so sanitized. I am pretty sure climbing a tree is more than fine even 30 years ago.
However by asking ChatGPT questions and recording their answers, you can use that to fine-tune the model they are creating. They can tell their own model to answer the way ChatGPT answered.
In short they are copying how ChatGPT would answer. and not finding out for themselves by creating their own Question and answer (or completion) datasets.
That is what RLHF is. But anyway, Chinese companies will be able to compete here, as this will be commoditized quickly and China is the king of creating and selling commodities.
Not sure if a dribbble user can suspend OpenAI.
Gemini Ultra is barely beating ChatGPT in their manufactured benchmarks, and this is all that they got.
What this means is that those who are saying, including people at Google, that they have better models but are not releasing them in the name of AI safety, imply that, at least in the realm of LLMs, Google DeepMind had nothing all along.
They then hyped up Gemini, and if Gemini Ultra is the best they have, I am not convinced that they have a better model.
Sundar's code red was genuinely alarming because they had to dig deep to make this Gemini model work, and they still ended up with a fake video. Even if Gemini was legitimate, it did not beat GPT-4 by leaps and bounds, and now GPT-5 is on the horizon, putting them a year behind. It makes me question if they had a secret powerful model all along
I remember when chatgpt was released Google was saying that they had much much better models that they are not releasing because they for AI Safety. Then theu released palm and palm 2 saying that it is time to release these models to beat ChatGPT. It was not a good model.
The they hyped up Gemini, and if Gemini Ultra is the best they have, I am not convinced that they have a better model. So this is it.
So in one year, we went from Google has to have the best model, they just do not want to release to they have the infrastructure and data and the talent to make the best model. Why they really had was nothing.
So this already makes the math wrong with these two assumptions. Actually the whole article reminded me of the Law of Diminishing Marginal Returns applied with wrong assumptions.
BTW I have a lot of these ChatGPT UI apps installed, mostly free and open-source. Perhaps this is really the era of going back to just talking to a chat interface like the old times.