Llama 2 – Meta AI

Re:Llama 2 – Meta AI by airgapstopgap on Tuesday July 18, 2023 @02:52PM (#36777492)

Do you realize that LLaMA-1 is just a very slightly smaller, comparably performing replication of Chinchilla [1], which DeepMind had completed a year prior to LLaMA's release? And has RLHF-ed into a suitable chatbot "Sparrow" [2] months earlier than ChatGPT was launched?

To assume that Google doesn't have anything competitive with Meta is to say that their papers just so happen to contain recipes for Meta's models but they've arrived at those not through training and benchmarking but by divination and bullshitting. This, let us say, does not sound plausible.

Then again, Microsoft uses LLaMA for research, and they should theoretically have some ability to get stuff from OpenAI. Evidently this isn't how any of this works, huh.

1. https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.15556

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sparrow_(bot)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Llama 2 – Meta AI by foobiekr on Tuesday July 18, 2023 @06:48PM (#36780073)

Google _internally_ feels that they are way behind. Forget commenters on HN, literally all of the google employees that I know believe that the company is failing here.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Llama 2 – Meta AI by airgapstopgap on Tuesday July 18, 2023 @10:50PM (#36781567)

This is not responsive to my arguments. Google can be arbitrarily far behind OpenAI or Anthropic, OP's idea that they feel threatened by LLaMA when they (well, Deepmind) have reached LLaMA level 18-10 months ago is still wrong.

[ Parent | on HN ]