4 ms·

I mean, what do you want? It’s so easy to be critical. Ok; you play then. What should they be doing? If they don’t, who is going to invest in open AI models

I mean, what do you want? It’s so easy to be critical. Ok; you play then. What should they be doing? If they don’t, who is going to invest in open AI models? OpenAI? Ha! Let’s say you’re in charge then. What’s your product strategy? I personally think this is better than doing nothing, even if it isn’t perfect.

AstixAndBelix 4y ago
>what should they be doing? If they want to make money while "making the internet a better place" they should develop their own LLM alternative with competitive cloud prices to GPT while releasing the model to everyone. If you tell me it's impossible to be competitive with GPT offering then they should not be wasting money on this endeavor
- wokwokwok 4y ago
  How is investing in open AI models different from what you just asked for? Have you run the 65B llama model? It’s shit. The refined 7B model is significantly better. The problem isn’t making a big model and open sourcing it. Those already exist Specially, bloom and llama. Tooling around it and refinement tooling seems like it’s a pretty good investment right now. “Make a GPT4” is an incredibly trivial and narrow view of this space.
  - AstixAndBelix 4y ago
    The have to sell something and recoup the investment
bioemerl 4y ago
> What should they be doing? Take that 30 million. Split it into chunks of 10k. Find random unaffiliated contributors to Firefox and give it to them. Promise another 10k for their next substantial contribution.
- ohgodplsno 4y ago
  Why should Mozilla subsidise your pet issues when it will not, in any case, make a return of 30 million from Firefox users ?
  - vorpalhex 4y ago
    Do you think AI safety investments are going to make 30M for Mozilla?
    - ohgodplsno 4y ago
      Probably not. But then again, Firefox hasn't really been the best at making money, has it ? Usage share keeps shrinking, and despite what many seem to believe, Mozilla isn't fully at fault here. Sure, they remove feature X (because their usage stats say nobody use it, because nerds turn off data collection then complain Mozilla doesn't take them into account), and that gets a few disgruntled people away from Firefox (to fucking where ? No other browser has that feature anyways). But the sheer weight of Google blasting ads for Chrome, mobile browsing becoming more and more prevalent (where Chrome is installed by default, or Safari), intercepting even search queries, purposefully breaking the web for Firefox once they've added a feature that they know Mozilla can't implement), Microsoft blasting ads for Edge, etc. To add to that fact, Mozilla doesn't have any other real revenue sources. Microsoft has about a thousand revenue making products that could each fund Edge development easily, Google is printing money with ads, Apple is printing money with phones, Mozilla is... reselling VPNs ? There's no additional ecosystem or product that Mozilla can sell. And even if they did, it's now too late. Ther users have shown that they are not willing to pay for their services ("nOt uNlEsS iT fUnDs FiReFoX aND nOt TeAChiNg bRowN pEoPlE tO uSe tHE iNtErNet" seems to have become their rallying cry). Mozilla _has_ to look for new avenues, because the current ones (Firefox, Thunderbird) will not ever make money on their own. That boat has sailed a long time ago.
      - Adraghast 4y ago
        > Mozilla _has_ to look for new avenues, because the current ones (Firefox, Thunderbird) will not ever make money on their own. The implicit assumption here seems to be that Mozilla needs to exist and if Firefox can’t sustain that existence they need to pivot to something that will. Why? So Google can keep using them as a fig leaf for their browser monopoly? So Mitchell Baker can keep collecting $3 million per year? Because the blind squirrel might find a nut someday? Maybe there’s a point where the remaining employees should just pack it up.

AstixAndBelix 4y ago

>what should they be doing? If they want to make money while "making the internet a better place" they should develop their own LLM alternative with competitive cloud prices to GPT while releasing the model to everyone. If you tell me it's impossible to be competitive with GPT offering then they should not be wasting money on this endeavor

wokwokwok 4y ago
How is investing in open AI models different from what you just asked for? Have you run the 65B llama model? It’s shit. The refined 7B model is significantly better. The problem isn’t making a big model and open sourcing it. Those already exist Specially, bloom and llama. Tooling around it and refinement tooling seems like it’s a pretty good investment right now. “Make a GPT4” is an incredibly trivial and narrow view of this space.
- AstixAndBelix 4y ago
  The have to sell something and recoup the investment

bioemerl 4y ago

> What should they be doing? Take that 30 million. Split it into chunks of 10k. Find random unaffiliated contributors to Firefox and give it to them. Promise another 10k for their next substantial contribution.

ohgodplsno 4y ago
Why should Mozilla subsidise your pet issues when it will not, in any case, make a return of 30 million from Firefox users ?
- vorpalhex 4y ago
  Do you think AI safety investments are going to make 30M for Mozilla?
  - ohgodplsno 4y ago
    Probably not. But then again, Firefox hasn't really been the best at making money, has it ? Usage share keeps shrinking, and despite what many seem to believe, Mozilla isn't fully at fault here. Sure, they remove feature X (because their usage stats say nobody use it, because nerds turn off data collection then complain Mozilla doesn't take them into account), and that gets a few disgruntled people away from Firefox (to fucking where ? No other browser has that feature anyways). But the sheer weight of Google blasting ads for Chrome, mobile browsing becoming more and more prevalent (where Chrome is installed by default, or Safari), intercepting even search queries, purposefully breaking the web for Firefox once they've added a feature that they know Mozilla can't implement), Microsoft blasting ads for Edge, etc. To add to that fact, Mozilla doesn't have any other real revenue sources. Microsoft has about a thousand revenue making products that could each fund Edge development easily, Google is printing money with ads, Apple is printing money with phones, Mozilla is... reselling VPNs ? There's no additional ecosystem or product that Mozilla can sell. And even if they did, it's now too late. Ther users have shown that they are not willing to pay for their services ("nOt uNlEsS iT fUnDs FiReFoX aND nOt TeAChiNg bRowN pEoPlE tO uSe tHE iNtErNet" seems to have become their rallying cry). Mozilla _has_ to look for new avenues, because the current ones (Firefox, Thunderbird) will not ever make money on their own. That boat has sailed a long time ago.
    - Adraghast 4y ago
      > Mozilla _has_ to look for new avenues, because the current ones (Firefox, Thunderbird) will not ever make money on their own. The implicit assumption here seems to be that Mozilla needs to exist and if Firefox can’t sustain that existence they need to pivot to something that will. Why? So Google can keep using them as a fig leaf for their browser monopoly? So Mitchell Baker can keep collecting $3 million per year? Because the blind squirrel might find a nut someday? Maybe there’s a point where the remaining employees should just pack it up.