zlacker

>>modele+(OP)
Whatever his reason may be (like resentment for jumping off the ship too soon and missing out, or standing in for humanity), I like what I read in the sense that it contains all the stuff that needs to be spoken about publicly, and the court seems to be the optimal place for this.

It feels like Microsoft is misusing the partnership only to block other companies from having access to the IP. They said they don't need the partnership, that they have got all what they need, so there would be no need to have the partnership.

If this is the way Microsoft misuses partnerships, I don't feel good about Mistral's new partnership, even if it means unlimited computing resources for them and still have the freedom to open source their models.

Not seeing Mistral Large as an open source model now has a bitter taste to it.

I also wonder if this lawsuit was the reason for him checking out Windows 11.

>>qwerto+zH1
> Not seeing Mistral Large as an open source model now has a bitter taste to it.

A company needs a product to sell. If they give away everything, they have nothing to sell. This was surely always the plan.

(1) They can give away the model but sell an API - but they can’t serve a model as cheap as Goog/Msft/Amzn who have better unit economics on their cloud and better pricing on GPUs (plus custom inference chips).

(2) they can sell the model. In which case they can’t give it away for free. Unlike open source code, there probably isn’t a market for support and similar “upsells” yet.

>>vineya+oI1
See The Linux Foundation, they don’t seem to have this problem.

>>bamboo+TW1
I don't think a single sample makes a trend. Genuinely asking: what other companies are fully open source and still profitable? Redhat comes to mind, but nothing else, at least no thing on the scale necessary to run AI.

>>HeavyS+DN2
Let's imagine OpenAI open sourced what they were doing and provided training on the technology they've developed, do you think they'd have trouble finding sponsorship ? Honestly?

>>bamboo+Y03
Sure they can find a sponsor… but Microsoft is spending billions on GPUs for them. Could the sponsor(s) cover those costs?

For better or worse, OpenAI monetizing GPT-3+ has been good for everyone. Hobbyists can’t afford to run the model anyways, and it pushed Google et al to start caring and develop their own models.

We probably wouldn’t have Gemini/LLaMa/etc see the light of day if OpenAI didn’t make LLMs go viral. It’s just disappointing that Google literally had an LLM good enough that was tricking employees into thinking it was sentient, and it took a competitor before they released it publicly.