3 ms·

I actually think this is one of the rare times where the small guys interests are aligned with Meta. Meta is scared of a world where they are locked out of LLM

I actually think this is one of the rare times where the small guys interests are aligned with Meta. Meta is scared of a world where they are locked out of LLM platforms, one where OpenAI gets to dictate rules around their use of the platform much like Apple and Google dictates rules around advertiser data and monetization on their mobile platforms. Small developers should be scared of a world where the only competitive LLMs are owned by those players too. Through this lense, Meta’s actions make more sense to me. Why invest billions in VR/AR? The answer is simple, don’t get locked out of the next platform, maybe you can own the next one. Why invest in LLMs? Again, don’t get locked out. Google and OpenAi/Microsoft are far larger and ahead of Meta right now and Meta genuinely believes the best way to make sure they have an LLM they control is to make everyone else have an LLM they can control. That way community efforts are unified around their standard.

mupuff1234 2y ago
Sure, but don't you think the "not getting locked out" is just the pre-requisite for their eventual goal of locking everyone else out?
- yesco 2y ago
  Does it really matter? Attributing goodwill to a company is like attributing goodwill to a spider that happens to clean up the bugs in your basement. Sure if they had the ability to, I'm confident Meta would try something like that, but they obviously don't, and will not for the foreseeable future. I have faith they will continue to do what's in their best interests and if their best interests happen to align with mine, then I will support that. Just like how I don't bother killing the spider in my basement because it helps clean up the other bugs.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - mupuff1234 2y ago
    But you also know that the spider has been laying eggs so you better have an extermination plan ready.
    - whitepaint 2y ago
      Everyone is aware of that. No one thinks Facebook or Mark are some saint entities. But while the spider is doing some good deeds why not just go "yeah! go spider!". Once it becomes an asshole, we will kill it. People are not dumb.
      - mupuff1234 2y ago
        It's not even truly open source, they set a user limit.
        xvector 2y ago
        I'm not particularly concerned about the user limit. The companies for which those limits will matter are so large that they should consider contributing back to humanity by developing their own SOTA foundation models.
- noiseinvacuum 2y ago
  If by "everyone else" here you mean 3 or 4 large players trying to create a regulatory moat around themselves then I am fine with them getting locked out and not being able to create a moat for next 3 decades.
myaccountonhn 2y ago
> I actually think this is one of the rare times where the small guys interests are aligned with Meta Small guys are the ones being screwed over by AI companies and having their text/art/code stolen without any attribution or adherence to license. I don’t think Meta is on their side at all
- MisterPea 2y ago
  That's a separate problem which affects small to large players alike (e.g. ScarJo). Small companies interests are aligned with Meta as they are now on an equal footing with large incumbent players. They can now compete with a similarly sized team at a big tech company instead of that team + dozens of AI scientists

mupuff1234 2y ago

Sure, but don't you think the "not getting locked out" is just the pre-requisite for their eventual goal of locking everyone else out?

yesco 2y ago
Does it really matter? Attributing goodwill to a company is like attributing goodwill to a spider that happens to clean up the bugs in your basement. Sure if they had the ability to, I'm confident Meta would try something like that, but they obviously don't, and will not for the foreseeable future. I have faith they will continue to do what's in their best interests and if their best interests happen to align with mine, then I will support that. Just like how I don't bother killing the spider in my basement because it helps clean up the other bugs.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- mupuff1234 2y ago
  But you also know that the spider has been laying eggs so you better have an extermination plan ready.
  - whitepaint 2y ago
    Everyone is aware of that. No one thinks Facebook or Mark are some saint entities. But while the spider is doing some good deeds why not just go "yeah! go spider!". Once it becomes an asshole, we will kill it. People are not dumb.
    - mupuff1234 2y ago
      It's not even truly open source, they set a user limit.
      - xvector 2y ago
        I'm not particularly concerned about the user limit. The companies for which those limits will matter are so large that they should consider contributing back to humanity by developing their own SOTA foundation models.
noiseinvacuum 2y ago
If by "everyone else" here you mean 3 or 4 large players trying to create a regulatory moat around themselves then I am fine with them getting locked out and not being able to create a moat for next 3 decades.

myaccountonhn 2y ago

> I actually think this is one of the rare times where the small guys interests are aligned with Meta Small guys are the ones being screwed over by AI companies and having their text/art/code stolen without any attribution or adherence to license. I don’t think Meta is on their side at all

MisterPea 2y ago
That's a separate problem which affects small to large players alike (e.g. ScarJo). Small companies interests are aligned with Meta as they are now on an equal footing with large incumbent players. They can now compete with a similarly sized team at a big tech company instead of that team + dozens of AI scientists