3 ms·

I stumbled on the paper the article talks about on /r/LocalLlama (this post: https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1l6ibwg/when_you_figure_out_its_all_ju

by davedx 1y ago

I stumbled on the paper the article talks about on /r/LocalLlama (this post: https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1l6ibwg/when_you_figure_out_its_all_just_math/ https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1l6ibwg/when_yo...) I found this comment to be relevant: "Keep in mind this whitepaper is really just Apple circling the wagons because they have dick for proprietary AI tech." When you question the source, it really does raise eyebrows, especially as an Apple shareholder: that these Apple employees are busy not working on their own AI programme that's now insanely far behind other big tech companies, but are instead spending their time casting shade on the reasoning models developed at other AI labs. What's the motivation here, really? The paper itself isn't particularly insightful or ground-breaking.

smitty1e 1y ago
> I found this comment to be relevant: "Keep in mind this whitepaper is really just Apple circling the wagons because they have dick for proprietary AI tech." Now, if we fed the relevant references into an AI model, would the model offer this as a possible motive for the paper in question?
- K0balt 1y ago
  Probably.
emp17344 1y ago
The paper was written by highly accomplished ML researchers who don’t have any stake in Apple’s continued success. Framing this peer-reviewed research written by respected authors as “sour grapes” is intellectually dishonest.
- reliabilityguy 1y ago
  > Framing this peer-reviewed research How do you know it was peer-reviewed? What venue had accepted this paper for publication?
  - tough 1y ago
    how many papers do apple publish under their own CDN/domains this was certainly a first for me when i saw it pop on hn the other day
    - reliabilityguy 1y ago
      They publish papers pretty frequently https://machinelearning.apple.com/research?domain=Speech%20and%20Natural%20Language%20Processing https://machinelearning.apple.com/research?domain=Speech%20a... Doesn’t mean they are peer reviewed
      - tough 1y ago
        got it thanks
- dandellion 1y ago
  It's easy to argue about the people who write the paper and their incentives. It takes a lot more effort to prove that the data, the procedure or the conclusion in the paper has flaws, and back it up.
- android521 1y ago
  If they get paid by apple, they have a stake
  - emp17344 1y ago
    This kind of statement isn’t productive. Everyone has a bias. If you don’t believe the paper is valid, I’d like to hear your substantive critique.
tikhonj 1y ago
The motivation is doing research to better understand AI? People's time and attention is not fungible—especially in inherently creative pursuits like research—and the mindset in your comment is exactly the sort of superficial administrative reasoning that leads to hype bubbles unconstrained by reality. "Why are you wasting your time trying to understand what we're doing instead of rushing ahead without thinking" is absolutely something I've heard from managers and executives, albeit phrased more politically, and it never ends well in a holistic accounting.
JimDabell 1y ago
This is ridiculous. If Apple wanted to make competing AI look bad, getting some researchers to publish a critical paper is hardly going to have any kind of worthwhile outcome.

by davedx 1y ago

smitty1e 1y ago

> I found this comment to be relevant: "Keep in mind this whitepaper is really just Apple circling the wagons because they have dick for proprietary AI tech." Now, if we fed the relevant references into an AI model, would the model offer this as a possible motive for the paper in question?

K0balt 1y ago
Probably.

emp17344 1y ago

The paper was written by highly accomplished ML researchers who don’t have any stake in Apple’s continued success. Framing this peer-reviewed research written by respected authors as “sour grapes” is intellectually dishonest.

reliabilityguy 1y ago
> Framing this peer-reviewed research How do you know it was peer-reviewed? What venue had accepted this paper for publication?
- tough 1y ago
  how many papers do apple publish under their own CDN/domains this was certainly a first for me when i saw it pop on hn the other day
  - reliabilityguy 1y ago
    They publish papers pretty frequently https://machinelearning.apple.com/research?domain=Speech%20and%20Natural%20Language%20Processing https://machinelearning.apple.com/research?domain=Speech%20a... Doesn’t mean they are peer reviewed
    - tough 1y ago
      got it thanks
dandellion 1y ago
It's easy to argue about the people who write the paper and their incentives. It takes a lot more effort to prove that the data, the procedure or the conclusion in the paper has flaws, and back it up.
android521 1y ago
If they get paid by apple, they have a stake
- emp17344 1y ago
  This kind of statement isn’t productive. Everyone has a bias. If you don’t believe the paper is valid, I’d like to hear your substantive critique.

tikhonj 1y ago

The motivation is doing research to better understand AI? People's time and attention is not fungible—especially in inherently creative pursuits like research—and the mindset in your comment is exactly the sort of superficial administrative reasoning that leads to hype bubbles unconstrained by reality. "Why are you wasting your time trying to understand what we're doing instead of rushing ahead without thinking" is absolutely something I've heard from managers and executives, albeit phrased more politically, and it never ends well in a holistic accounting.

JimDabell 1y ago

This is ridiculous. If Apple wanted to make competing AI look bad, getting some researchers to publish a critical paper is hardly going to have any kind of worthwhile outcome.