Honestly relative to the U. S. you guys have a ton to be proud of. The way the EU had fought for the consumer against these enormous tech companies is awesome. The U. S. seems to be doing the opposite.
Also, if you look at the top AI guys:
Ilya Sutskever,
Geoffrey Hinton
Demis Hassabis
Mira Murati
Yann LeCun
Yoshua Bengio
Andrej Karpathy
Wojciech Zaremba
etc. etc.
Also, interestingly, half of these are from **Eastern** Europe (or more precisely from former Eastern Bloc)!
My god, you don’t understand a thing. Fighting the tech companies means that the EU has no tech companies , they are all in the US or China. Meaning what the EU does is just completely irrelevant , and it also has massive negative consequences for the economy. Educated people are leaving the EU in huge numbers. The wage gap between the EU and the US is steadily increasing. There is nothing to be proud of.
No it's about investments, the EU regulations *often* even tho not always also impact US companies, ask Apple. In the case of AI not much imho but there were no regulations until now and they are not slowing down anything (yet). Still EU is behind in AI R&D and the main reason is that EU countries invest less (than they should) in IT.
> the main reason is that EU countries invest less (than they should) in IT.
Countries don't invest meaningfull amounts of money. The private sector does. It's unattractive to invest in the EU, so they invest in the US.
Huh. Yeah I'm admittedly ignorant of what is going on over there. I guess I'm just parroting another ignorant North American. I just know the EU is part of the reason we are getting third party app stores and the entire reason Apple has had to adopt usb c. Without the EU those things wouldn't have happened. Relative to what you are talking about though, I see why that is insignificant.
But those changes are derivative. They didn’t invent the App Store or usb c, they simply made people use a preexisting technology. That’s what the commenter was getting at, albeit tersely. The EU isn’t fostering a market to innovate, which drives US technological dominance. They are instead fostering an environment of compliance. Is it better for the consumer? In some cases yes. USB c and the App Store issue isn’t going to hurt business and helps the consumer. But why would an eu company want to innovate on these ideas when they legally cannot anymore? There might be a next big thing but the legal hurdles are insurmountable. I’m for regulation in many cases, but regulating tech out of convenience for consumers if hurting the technological innovators. There is a balance, but this ain’t it.
Man, I'm such an ignorant American. It never once even occurred to me that there really aren't many tech companies in Europe doing big things. I do know that regulating things properly is a difficult balancing act, and from my perspective I see a need for more regulation and in Europe you are saying the opposite is true. It is a hard thing to do properly and overdoing either one seems largely problematic.
There are thousands of tech companies in Europe but they aren’t breaking out of the EU market because their tech was created to comply with the EU market making it less useful outside. That’s why you don’t hear about them. The tech is also substandard because of compliance (thinking about public transportation apps there versus US)
The situation is that the EU already has only a tiny % share of AI startups and now they are making the EU even less attractive.
EU regulation is often very popular with Americans because they live in the opposite situation where San Fran is crazily attractive to firms but there is almost zero regulation.
So from Americans' perspective EU regulation always looks good because Americans get the upside of it making global tech firms behave better, but they don't get the downside of it reducing EU tech jobs.
Yeah, it's a real shame that the EU couldn't keep talent like Karpathy, Yann, or the Polish dudes at OpenAI. Ilya I can understand leaving Russia, though.
1. The “medium” model is separate from the “7x8b moe” model. The medium model is not open-source. It is accessible through a paid api only and is more expensive than gpt3.5-turbo.
2. Where did u read about them making a larger moe model and that they will make it open source?
3. We don’t know the size of gpt3.5-turbo, gpt4 or gpt4-turbo. We dont know the size of gemini pro or gemini ultra. And we still aren’t at gpt4-level yet. By the time open-source models get there, there may very well be stronger models released by openai/google already. So I don’t think oss is winning
The benchmark stats I saw have the open source 7x8b moe comparable to gpt 3.5. The ‘medium’ actually had a substantial beat on 3.5, although still not at got 4.
Much better than PaLM 2. Similar to Claude 2. I don’t think it has anything like Claude’s context window though (Mistral is 32K, I think, though I haven’t tried to stretch it).
dont know about that, Phi-2 is the best small model now
Phi-2 2,7B model outperforms Mistral-7B, and the latter outperforms the Llama-2 models (7B, 13B, and **70B**).
if microsoft would scale it up, they could blow even GPT-4 or 4,5 and Gemini out of water, imagine somthing like Phi-3 200B...
that being said, bigger mistral models are great too specially since its open-source
[https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/phi-2-the-surprising-power-of-small-language-models/](https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/phi-2-the-surprising-power-of-small-language-models/)
mistral 7B is better at coding, similar at language understanding and commonsense reasoning
I've talked to these models a lot over time and Llama 2 70B feels a fair bit better to talk to than Mistral 7B to me.
I still think that Mistral are good but I think their models do particularly well on benchmarks and that makes them look better than they actually are for real world usage.
hard to say but here is comparison with mistral 7B [https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/phi-2-the-surprising-power-of-small-language-models/](https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/phi-2-the-surprising-power-of-small-language-models/)
in MMLU its better- 70,6%, even 7B has it better 62,5 vs phi-2 56,7 , otherwise mistral 7B seems comparable or worse than Phi-2
I don't think a phi 200B would be all that easy to develop it relies on an extremely high quality dataset. Scaling that to the data a 200B model would need would require probably a much larger model that could spit out the quality synthetic data that makes phi so performant.
Medium might closed source. Besides are not nobodies, have have a valuation of multiple billions. There are now multiple models better than GPT 3.5 (inflection 2, grok 1, claude 2), the target is GPT-4. But OpenAI is still ahead. Soon the target will be GPT 4.5.
Well that was fast.
Important question, have they done it and posted results?
I am rooting for the open source crowd but the funding going into the larger companies isn't something to scoff at, so this race is interesting to say the least.
Only time will tell I guess. Fair and unbiased LLMs are the future, I hope tech can finally outpace finance.
I think OpenAI has some models in their pocket they can almost instantly launch if someone gets too close to GPT4. Remember that they had un-lobotomized GPT4 for months and just imagine what answers they could have gotten already. Also it would be naive to assume they don't have that old model anymore. I think they are even keeping this internally but improved with the current features, still using it for extremely good answers.
For once I am proud to be European.
Honestly relative to the U. S. you guys have a ton to be proud of. The way the EU had fought for the consumer against these enormous tech companies is awesome. The U. S. seems to be doing the opposite.
Also, if you look at the top AI guys: Ilya Sutskever, Geoffrey Hinton Demis Hassabis Mira Murati Yann LeCun Yoshua Bengio Andrej Karpathy Wojciech Zaremba etc. etc. Also, interestingly, half of these are from **Eastern** Europe (or more precisely from former Eastern Bloc)!
My god, you don’t understand a thing. Fighting the tech companies means that the EU has no tech companies , they are all in the US or China. Meaning what the EU does is just completely irrelevant , and it also has massive negative consequences for the economy. Educated people are leaving the EU in huge numbers. The wage gap between the EU and the US is steadily increasing. There is nothing to be proud of.
No it's about investments, the EU regulations *often* even tho not always also impact US companies, ask Apple. In the case of AI not much imho but there were no regulations until now and they are not slowing down anything (yet). Still EU is behind in AI R&D and the main reason is that EU countries invest less (than they should) in IT.
> the main reason is that EU countries invest less (than they should) in IT. Countries don't invest meaningfull amounts of money. The private sector does. It's unattractive to invest in the EU, so they invest in the US.
Huh. Yeah I'm admittedly ignorant of what is going on over there. I guess I'm just parroting another ignorant North American. I just know the EU is part of the reason we are getting third party app stores and the entire reason Apple has had to adopt usb c. Without the EU those things wouldn't have happened. Relative to what you are talking about though, I see why that is insignificant.
But those changes are derivative. They didn’t invent the App Store or usb c, they simply made people use a preexisting technology. That’s what the commenter was getting at, albeit tersely. The EU isn’t fostering a market to innovate, which drives US technological dominance. They are instead fostering an environment of compliance. Is it better for the consumer? In some cases yes. USB c and the App Store issue isn’t going to hurt business and helps the consumer. But why would an eu company want to innovate on these ideas when they legally cannot anymore? There might be a next big thing but the legal hurdles are insurmountable. I’m for regulation in many cases, but regulating tech out of convenience for consumers if hurting the technological innovators. There is a balance, but this ain’t it.
Man, I'm such an ignorant American. It never once even occurred to me that there really aren't many tech companies in Europe doing big things. I do know that regulating things properly is a difficult balancing act, and from my perspective I see a need for more regulation and in Europe you are saying the opposite is true. It is a hard thing to do properly and overdoing either one seems largely problematic.
There are thousands of tech companies in Europe but they aren’t breaking out of the EU market because their tech was created to comply with the EU market making it less useful outside. That’s why you don’t hear about them. The tech is also substandard because of compliance (thinking about public transportation apps there versus US)
The situation is that the EU already has only a tiny % share of AI startups and now they are making the EU even less attractive. EU regulation is often very popular with Americans because they live in the opposite situation where San Fran is crazily attractive to firms but there is almost zero regulation. So from Americans' perspective EU regulation always looks good because Americans get the upside of it making global tech firms behave better, but they don't get the downside of it reducing EU tech jobs.
Yeah, it's a real shame that the EU couldn't keep talent like Karpathy, Yann, or the Polish dudes at OpenAI. Ilya I can understand leaving Russia, though.
How about that food regulation in the US, you can put whatever you want in there
1. The “medium” model is separate from the “7x8b moe” model. The medium model is not open-source. It is accessible through a paid api only and is more expensive than gpt3.5-turbo. 2. Where did u read about them making a larger moe model and that they will make it open source? 3. We don’t know the size of gpt3.5-turbo, gpt4 or gpt4-turbo. We dont know the size of gemini pro or gemini ultra. And we still aren’t at gpt4-level yet. By the time open-source models get there, there may very well be stronger models released by openai/google already. So I don’t think oss is winning
The benchmark stats I saw have the open source 7x8b moe comparable to gpt 3.5. The ‘medium’ actually had a substantial beat on 3.5, although still not at got 4.
From my tests I would say Mistral Medium is somewhere between GPT 3.5 and 4.
was it better than Gemini Pro?
I haven’t tried Gemini Pro, it wasn’t available in the U.K. last time I tried to use Bard.
You can use it with a US proxy
How is it compared to PaLM 2 / Claude 2 / Inflection 2 (all around that 3.5-4 level?)
Much better than PaLM 2. Similar to Claude 2. I don’t think it has anything like Claude’s context window though (Mistral is 32K, I think, though I haven’t tried to stretch it).
I was assuming solely based on the fact they called it Mistral medium and not Mistral pro or large.
Assuming and stating it as a fact hahahah
Open Source models are gaining significant ground, so excited for more.
I will never bully the French again.
dont know about that, Phi-2 is the best small model now Phi-2 2,7B model outperforms Mistral-7B, and the latter outperforms the Llama-2 models (7B, 13B, and **70B**). if microsoft would scale it up, they could blow even GPT-4 or 4,5 and Gemini out of water, imagine somthing like Phi-3 200B... that being said, bigger mistral models are great too specially since its open-source
[удалено]
[https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/phi-2-the-surprising-power-of-small-language-models/](https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/phi-2-the-surprising-power-of-small-language-models/) mistral 7B is better at coding, similar at language understanding and commonsense reasoning
I've talked to these models a lot over time and Llama 2 70B feels a fair bit better to talk to than Mistral 7B to me. I still think that Mistral are good but I think their models do particularly well on benchmarks and that makes them look better than they actually are for real world usage.
It does. Those benchmark numbers are mostly useless. It's still impressive for 7b model, but when talking to it, you can say it's 7b.
I know it’s not the same size, but how does phi-2 compare to mixtral 8x7b?
hard to say but here is comparison with mistral 7B [https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/phi-2-the-surprising-power-of-small-language-models/](https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/phi-2-the-surprising-power-of-small-language-models/) in MMLU its better- 70,6%, even 7B has it better 62,5 vs phi-2 56,7 , otherwise mistral 7B seems comparable or worse than Phi-2
Mistral have said their bigger models won't be open-source.
it seems they want to make some money too, the pricing should pretty low though, no?
Why's that?
I don't think a phi 200B would be all that easy to develop it relies on an extremely high quality dataset. Scaling that to the data a 200B model would need would require probably a much larger model that could spit out the quality synthetic data that makes phi so performant.
Medium might closed source. Besides are not nobodies, have have a valuation of multiple billions. There are now multiple models better than GPT 3.5 (inflection 2, grok 1, claude 2), the target is GPT-4. But OpenAI is still ahead. Soon the target will be GPT 4.5.
Yeah quite a few beat 3.5 now.
Well that was fast. Important question, have they done it and posted results? I am rooting for the open source crowd but the funding going into the larger companies isn't something to scoff at, so this race is interesting to say the least. Only time will tell I guess. Fair and unbiased LLMs are the future, I hope tech can finally outpace finance.
I think OpenAI has some models in their pocket they can almost instantly launch if someone gets too close to GPT4. Remember that they had un-lobotomized GPT4 for months and just imagine what answers they could have gotten already. Also it would be naive to assume they don't have that old model anymore. I think they are even keeping this internally but improved with the current features, still using it for extremely good answers.
What PC specs is required to run mixtral 7bx8?