Posted by pseudolus 4/8/2025
This is the culture of META hurting them, they are paying "AI VPs" millions of dollars to go to status meetings to get dates for when these models will be done. Meanwhile, deepseek r1 has a flat hierarchy with engineers that actually understand low level computing
Its making a mockery of big tech, and is why startups exist. Big company employees rise the ranks by building skill sets other than producing true economic value
You haven't been keeping up. Less than 2 weeks ago, Google released a model that has crushed the competition, clearly being SotA while currently effectively free for personal use.
Gemini 2.0 was already good, people just weren't paying attention. In fact 1.5 pro was already good, and ironically remains the #1 model at certain very specific tasks, despite being set for deprecation in September.
Google just suffered from their completely botched initial launch way back when (remember Bard?), rushed before the product was anywhere near ready, making them look lile a bunch of clowns compared to e.g. OpenAI. That left a lasting impression on those who don't devote significant time to keeping up with newer releases.
Gemini subscription? Surely if you're "using LLMs correctly" you'd have been using the APIs for everything anyway. Subscriptions are generally for non-techy consumers.
In any case, just straight up saying "it isn't good" is absurd, even if you personally prefer others.
There is no system to pitch an idea as opening new frontiers - all ideas must be able to optimize some number that leadership has already been tricked into believing is important.
It's only because lying ("puffery") about everything has become the norm in corporate America that indeed, almost all listed companies commit securities fraud. If they'd go back to being honest businessmen, no more securities fraud. Just stop claiming things that aren't true. This is a very real option they could take. If they don't, then they're willingly and knowingly commiting securities fraud. But the meme makes it sound to people as if it's unavoidable, when it's anything but.
If Mark, both through Meta and through his own resources, has the capital to hire and retain the best AI researchers / teams, and claims he's doing so, but puts out a model that sucks, he's liable. It's probably not directly fraud, but if he claims he's trying to compete with Google or Microsoft or Apple or whoever, yet doesn't adequately deploy a comparable amount of resources, capital, people, whatever, and doesn't explain why, it could (stretch) be securities fraud....I think.
They have vowed not to make that mistake again so are pushing for an open future that won't be dominated by a few companies that could arbitrarily hurt Meta's business.
That's the stated rationale at least and I think it more or less makes sense
The old joke is they're losing money on every sale but they'll make up for it in volume.
None of the models Meta put out are actually open source (by any measure), and everyone who are redistributing Llama models or any derivatives, or use Llama models for their business, are on the hook of getting sued in the future based on the terms and conditions people been explicitly/implicitly agreeing to when they use/redistribute these models.
If you start depending on these Llama models which have unfavorable proprietary terms today but Meta don't act on them, doesn't mean they won't act on it in the future. Maybe this has all been a play to get people into this position, so Meta can in the future start charging for them or something else.
This has happened many times before in US history.
The goal is long term control over a technology's marketshare, as winner take all dynamics are in play here.
> Critics have pointed out that xAI’s approach involves running Grok 3 multiple times and cherry-picking the best output while comparing it against single runs of competitor models.
[1] https://medium.com/@cognidownunder/the-hype-machine-gpt-4-5-...
Every other player: Black Forest Labs' Flux, Stability.ai's Stable Diffusion, and even closed models like Ideogram and Midjourney, are all on the path to extinction.
Image generation and editing must be multimodal. Full stop.
Google Imagen will probably be the first model to match the capabilities of 4o. I'm hoping one of the open weights labs or Chinese AI giants will release a model that demonstrates similar capabilities soon. That'll keep the race neck and neck.
Although the Ghibli trend is market validation, I suspect that competitors may not want to copy it just yet.
If you factor in the amount of time wasted with prompting and inpainting, it's extremely well worth it.