Gemma, despite being developed by a company worth billions of dollars, is a phenomonally poor model.<p>I tried the open source release yesterday. I started with the input string "hello" and it responded "I am a new user to this forum and I am looking for 100000000000000..." with zeros repeating forever.<p>Ok, cool I guess. Looks like I'll be sticking with GPT-4.
Anyone who uses these models for more than 10 min will immediately realize that they're really, really bad compared to other free, OSS models. Even Phi-2 was giving me "on par" results except that its a model of a different league.<p>Many models are being released now, which is good to keep OpenAI on their toes and not mess up, but, truth be told, I've yet to see _any_ OSS model that I can run on my machine being as good as ChatGPT 3 (not 3.5, not 4, but the original one from when everyone went crazy).<p>My hopes for consumer hardware ChatGPT-3.5 within 2024 probably lie with what Meta will keep building upon.<p>Google was great, once. Now, they're a mere bystander in the larger scheme of things. I think that's a good thing. Everything in the world is cyclic and ephemeral and Google enjoyed their time while it lasted, but, newer and better things are and will, keep on coming.<p>PS: Completely unrelated, but, gmail is now the only Google product I actively use. I don't, genuinely, remember the last time I did a Google Search... When I need to do my own digging I use Phind these days.<p>Times are changing and that's great for tech and future generations joining the field and workforce!
Can we just stop talking about Gemini/Gemma for at least two years before it's improved? In fact, the two-year mark is rather strategic recommendation, because I guarantee it'll become vaporware by then anyway with Google's track record. It's outrageously poorly performing.
Gemma (and Gemini) are heavily nerfed. Why are they on the news lately?<p>Also, Gemma is a +9B model. I think it's not okay that Google compared it with Mistral and Llama 2 (7B) models.<p>Google also took llama.cpp and used it in one of their Github repos without giving credit. Again, not cool.<p>All this hype seems to be backed by Google to boost their models whereas in practice, the models are not that good.<p>Google also made a big claim about Gemini 1.5 1M context window, but at the end of their article they said they'll limit it to 128K. So all that 1M flex was for nothing?<p>Not to mention their absurd approach in alignment in image creation.