Meta does everything OpenAI should be

I think one should attribute a good amount of credit of this to Yann LeCun (head of meta&#x27;s research). From early stage he have been vocal about keeping things open-source, and voiced that to Mark before even joining. (and credit to Mark for keeping that).<p>It probably also stems from his experience working at Bell Labs, and how his pioneering work very much required a lot of help from things available openly, as is still the case in academia.<p>The man have been repeating the advantage of open-source being the better option, and been <i>very</i> vocal about his opposition to &quot;regulate AI (read: let a handful of US government aligned closed-source companies have complete monopoly on AI under the guise of ethics)&quot;. On this point he (and meta) stands in a pretty stark contrast to a lot of big-tech AI mainstream voices.<p>Me myself recently moved some research tech stack to meta stuff, and unlike platform that basically stops being supported as soon as the main contributor finishes his PhD, it have been great to work on it (and they&#x27;re usually open to feedback and fixes&#x2F;PR).

Meta is commoditizing their products&#x27; complement.[1]<p>OpenAI can&#x27;t - these models (or rather, the APIs) <i>are</i> their product.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.joelonsoftware.com&#x2F;2002&#x2F;06&#x2F;12&#x2F;strategy-letter-v&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.joelonsoftware.com&#x2F;2002&#x2F;06&#x2F;12&#x2F;strategy-letter-v&#x2F;</a>

Meta is not in the AI business. Meta is in the attention business (in this case, <i>actually</i>, no pun intended). If AI is not your product (as in: not how you need to make money), you can be be &quot;generous&quot;. Making other peoples products less competitive by aggressively subsidising part of your business is not that cool of a move.<p>If Meta starts being all open and generous about their core assets, we can start talking. But we will not start talking. Because that will not happen.

When we say <i>should be</i>, this assumes some kind of intention, no? Meta making things open is a means, not an end. The end is to weaken competition to position itself economically. The end is not to make things &quot;open&quot; in and of itself which is what the charter of OpenAI is (was?).

I think people should be calling out Yann&#x27;s role in this more. Mark might or might not have come up with this strategy on his own, but Yann was 100% pushing for Open Models and I&#x27;d like to think he has enough weight with Mark to make it happen.

<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.li&#x2F;ZQnSP" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.li&#x2F;ZQnSP</a> (since Reddit blocks VPNs now)

My kids are <i>hooked</i> on &quot;Meta AI&quot; that&#x27;s now built into Whatsapp. I have very mixed feelings about this and have tried my best to ensure they understand the limitations, but I also don&#x27;t see an obvious way to disable it without getting rid of Whatsapp entirely, and thanks to the network effect that&#x27;s not really an option either.

I wish they would open source their TTS system, as they did with Whisper.

I still think it&#x27;s crucial to recognize OpenAI&#x27;s impact on the field, because without them ChatGPT wouldn&#x27;t exist and it&#x27;s unlikely any other organization would have developed such advanced LLMs so early (or even released them for free). It&#x27;s easier to come second and release stuff for free to appear &quot;generous&quot;.

False.<p>Everything there are doing is in service of advancing the singularly corrupt surveillance and &quot;consumer&quot; control service that is their bread and butter.<p>Tactical contributions are entirely in the service of strategic goals, in the service of a leadership and culture who have proven to unerringly do the worst thing possible so long as it increases their own wealth and power.<p>The list of whistleblowers and insider accounts of reprehensible and inexcusable abuses is endless and ever-growing.<p>Wtf would ever engage with them or their products?<p>Their models are the moral equivalent of &quot;good data&quot; from experiments run in gulags and concentraiton camps.

No surprises here as predicted in [0]<p><i>&quot;Anyone building $0 free AI models that can be used on-device, like Stability, Meta, Apple, etc have already &#x27;won&#x27; the AI race to zero.&quot;</i><p>The surprise here was that Google joined in the $0 free LLM race. Even when this is all over, both Google and Meta can do more than just LLMs; and people really have to think beyond this.<p>But at this point, it is clear that OpenAI&#x27;s head start on GPTs is rapidly getting eroded as everyone else is catching up.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=37606400">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=37606400</a>

FAIR really does stand out from the field on available weights, safety considerations that seem at least plausibly connected to abuse potential, and a long-term, serious academic research agenda.<p>And I’ll remind you that their ocean of multi-modal, longitudinal over decades training set is not in any “uncertain” state as concerns copyright.<p>I’m pretty fricken annoyed with e.g. Boz given the fact that people at least sort of believe Carmack and Palmer now, which means they at least sort of believe me now.<p>But that increases, not decreases my obligation to be fair, and Meta AI is on fire.

Well for starters Meta has a lot of consumer facing stuff like social networks. And they are also able to produce hardware devices (being a much bigger company too). OpenAI had to invent the whole AI market but building customers is harder.<p>The bigger question is why google is so incompetent with AI now. Granted they still have Google Search monopoly but I think search without going to Google will be the future.<p>I do wonder if the most profitable AI stuff is coming from Microsoft due to their B2B skew.

No, as Hinton says in his own words &quot;it&#x27;s crazy to open source something so powerful&quot;. OpenAI is being responsible, LeCun still thinks AI is not smarter than a cat (literally he said that month ago). And he has taken Zuck for a ride.<p>Ilya and Hinton can be considered the inventors of this whole LLM novelty and they both agree they should not be open sourced. Says a lot.

OpenAI exists on a lot of computers allready - since their ideas are part of Microsoft Copilot.<p>People here are usually programmers, who can and are allowed to do more than average users.<p>If we treat &quot;open&quot; as &quot;open to the masses&quot; (as strange as it sounds) then putting it as a part of MS office brought it to many people.

As a bit of a side note, Meta&#x27;s AI democratization will help with AR&#x2F;VR. There is a dearth of interesting content to use on them. Open-sourcing will certainly create a fleet of content creators for the platform.<p>I expect the are creating a Sora competitor in the background as well.

Meta has an incentive to release free technology that could threaten their business competitors who stand to gain with closed AI. OpenAI isn&#x27;t rich yet, so they have to monetize.<p>Their behavior is obvious when accounting for their positions.

Why is Reddit blocking my vpn?

favorite comment from reddit<p>&gt; Anything that pisses Sam &quot;regulation for thee not for me&quot; Altman off makes me extremely happy

Just remember that FB will weaponize everything once it makes sense to them financially.

hello mate so sorry but I came across your page and I thought I should pass this vital info,Well I suggest you should message Rothstein_code on instagram or Facebook @Rothstein_Code he’s a staff at meta ,and Their ic3 who handles account recoveries,this is an opportunity to reach one of their staff, I lost my account and the support teams couldn&#x27;t do anything about it but this guy was able to help me out,all thanks to him. Hey! The support team doesn&#x27;t work no more After the pandemic so You can still get access to your account am sure, quickly send a message to @Rothstein_code on Facebook&#x2F;Instagram page he will sort this out for you,he works with meta.

Meta is not just commoditizing their complement<p>AI can be a superior substitute for the low quality interactions on Facebook - one that never exploits your attention. And AI can be used to de-enshittify Facebook&#x27;s contents.<p>AI as a direct substitute<p>AI can provide social support and feedback more constructively than people you meet in Facebook communities, and is not instrumented with anxiety inducing bloat.<p>I spend less time arguing in non productive debates on Facebook now, and more time talking with AI which helps me develop ideas and solve conflicts.<p>AI is more than just a stochastic parrot in this regard - it&#x27;s increasingly a sound advocate. And it is hallucinating far less these days with the newest paid models.<p>When I want to talk to a random asshole who gives me grief, I talk to someone on Facebook.<p>If I want to talk about a topic and actually get somewhere beneficial to me, I&#x27;ll talk to AI.<p>AI as De-Enshittware<p>There is another way that meta is not necessarily acting in their own best interests here. We can likely use llms to filter out the attention abusing bull crap from Facebook, adaptively overcoming countermeasures Facebook puts up.<p>The fact that LLMs can potentially de-enshittify Facebook&#x27;s attention modification mechanisms makes it into an &quot;indirect substitute&quot; or &quot;displacement good&quot; for the enshittware version of Facebook.<p>Conclusion: Commoditizing AI might turn into a massive footgun for Meta<p>While open AI clearly hurts their immediate competition, it can also directly substitute the Facebook product. And it may indirectly make the Facebook less awful for users - and therefore less profitable for Meta.

tangent: it might not be worth the tens of billions that have been dumped into the &quot;Metaverse&quot;, but I&#x27;ve always thought FB rebranding as &quot;Meta&quot; was a savvy strategic decision. Unlike Alphabet — which everyone still calls &quot;Google&quot; b&#x2F;c Google search is still the most useful and ubiquitous part of the Alphabet conglomerate — plenty of people use things like Whatsapp and IG without ever having to touch FB (beyond its login infrastructure) and many of these users despise FB and its perceived &quot;boomer&quot; audience and content.<p>&quot;Meta AI&quot; at least sounds much more congruent and palatable than &quot;Facebook AI&quot;, even if the people and processes remain the same.

Meta weaponizes open source to ensure no technological moats develop which increases the value of their moats:<p>- Data (Meta is one of two competitice companies when it comes to data volume) - Compute (Meta is #1 here) - Platform &#x2F; eyeballs. (Meta is #1 here, Bytedance will be degraded)<p>It degrades talent moat and destroys proprietary technology moats.<p>Open source does PMF, R&amp;D and de-risking for them while destroying any proprietary competitor - especially ones that don’t have the funding to fight the price dumping effect.<p>And make no mistake, in most industries this would be illegal dumping - if a furniture chain started giving away superior lumbering equipments to anyone cross financed with external money to deny sales to their competitors it would be handled with swiftly and decisively.<p>Sundar right now will be getting questions from their investors of why they spend 200M on Gemini if anyone with enough data and compute can achieve the same thing. Remember “We have no moat and neither has OpenAI?”. It took less than a year for that to play out go brutal effect. Llama3 450B will have google up at night.<p>It also allows meta to effectively not hire armies or product and engineering talent because they get that value for free. Llama.cpp alone is worth hundreds of millions in combined R&amp;D at this point, catching up the llama architecture to its competitors.<p>Finally the result of AI is a commoditization of content creation - more content in an attention saturated ecosystem increases the competition for eyeballs - aka what companies have to pay to beat their competition on the marketplaces of attention.<p>And companies will be able to spend money on that because they can fire their creators (that’s what the Sora and Vasa class of models ultimately will do within a year) and save on compute - only to spend it on demand generation.<p>Analog to how Amazon managed to run by the spirit of open source to monetize open source software without giving back, Meta has shaped the passion and desire of people to build and share into a powerful weapon it wields with deadly precision against its competition, all while being able for benefit from the collateral effects on every level.<p>Mark is nothing but predictable here - he’s an aggressive, always at war General and “commoditize your complements” and “accelerate technology adoption to improve the business environment” are some of his key gambits (see emails on oculus adoption) and the road is littered with the burnt out husks of previous plays - such as the entire news business he commoditized for attention and reengagement.<p>Yes there is side effects that are good - the freeing of the technology from the yoke of Google and Altman Corp, but that does mean there’s any charitable intent here. Mark does not give a damn about the common good. He cares about winning. Always has.

Why does Reddit block my VPN?

No amount of wishful thinking will make OpenAI change their course.<p>Some of the Reddit comments say that Meta has contributed to Torch and done other things, etc. but so has OpenAI…<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;openai">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;openai</a><p>Their engineers. Their time. Their knowledge. Open-Source.<p>And who knows what future will bring. Maybe a model like GPT-4 will eventually be made public. To this day it is still <i>the</i> benchmark, which is forcing other teams to find solutions for them to be able to get to that point also.