> As outlined above, these results demonstrate that dolly-v2-12b is not state of the art, and in fact underperforms dolly-v1-6b in some evaluation benchmarks. We believe this owes to the composition and size of the underlying fine tuning datasets, but a robust statement as to the sources of these variations requires further study.
Taking a moment to appreciate the integrity of the team.
Ditto, this is release early release often without necessarily meaning move fast and break things. Other teams can do the equivalent of Alpaca to Llama and we can all learn for the next round.
One of the creators here - yeah, the thing we have our eyes on is the vector not the point.
It’s astounding how adaptable these open models are, even with just a quarter of the Alpaca data. We’re a team of machine learning engineers and hackers, not an AI science lab, but that’s kind of the point frankly - this whole exercise appears to be far easier that it might at first seem.
I haven't played with the model just yet - but just eye balling it's performance it's significantly worse. I'm surprised they don't have Pythia on there as that's what they're based on from my understanding.
At their performance level it's the most important to compare to GPT-neoX, and I do appreciate they aren't making the "95% of GPT4" claims that some fine-tuned llama models are.
EDIT: For databricks people: I'd love to see this compared with Pythia, LLaMa, Alpaca, and vicuna/gpt4all if possible.
Out of curiosity: what's an example of a metric that you would use to evaluate the ability of the model? For example, just looking qualitatively, asking a prompt like "How do I tie a tie?" to Pythia produces content that isn't even reasonably responding to that. And yet many benchmarks have no problem with that
The article doesn’t emphasize the impact made by new technologies invented in pursuit of this prize. For example, this contest was a motivating factor for the creators of Apache Spark.
If anything, I think tech is protected from the effects of the coming recession. Our industry is one of the best poised to maintain business as usual. That said, the impact of the economic effects is coming.
Are you kidding me? Tech is so ridiculously inflated, just look at how many stupid "tech" startups were created recently. This will deleverage now. Not even the "big guys" are so super safe - a lot of VC money is recycled back into "tech" via AWS bills and online ads.
The only worse business right now is probably oil, especially fracking. Those guys are doomed.
Depends on which "big guys" you are on about. Likely, it's those who have recently IPO'd on VC money and depend on lots of moving parts and huge costs like cloud costs, logistics, travel and are also in specific domains which are waiting to be sherlocked by a FAAMNG company. The best of all:
It is those "tech" startups who generate little revenue and no profit, but take in VC money into their series D,E,F and G+ for years.
Ultimately, it comes to no surprise that layoffs from such startups would happen at this time since my so called "machine learning crystal ball" predicted this [0] anyway whilst ignoring other earlier vacuous predictions. FAAMNG and other profitable companies will survive this.
When I wrote "big guys" I meant Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, Google, Amazon. And I meant even those aren't safe due to the reasons mentioned in the GP, despite large cash buffers and generally excellent credit.
Many (most?) companies will survive, the question is in what form.
Correct. No-one's completely safe. But those companies you mention that are made up of the FAAMNG including Netflix are powering the majority of the internet services such as (AWS, GCP, Azure, Facebook Ads and Apple Services) which are used by many developers and startups. For some of them, this isn't even their main source of revenue generation.
It's the unsustainable VC funded, near-zero revenue, rapid growth and high costs burn rate so called 'tech' startups which some have IPO'd or some are still raising capital with no plan for a profit that will not survive.
You are completely wrong. Tech is definitely not worst industry affected by the corona virus by a long shot. Service workers are definitely not a job that can be done at home. Tech workers usually have good salaries while service workers are likely to live paycheck to paycheck. Plus they do not have the same access to medical benefits.
From direct effects, maybe. But no one is immune from the second order effects. Once our customers start going out of business because they are directly exposed, they can't buy our software anymore.
Aye, downloaded Uber Eats and SkipTheDishes for the first time this weekend.
The streets are empty and the local gub'mnt has been advising people to avoid gatherings like restaurants and bars. They're open still, and probably slingin mad amounts of food, but all delivery...
> tech is protected from the effects of the coming recession.
How so?
> Our industry is one of the best poised to maintain business as usual.
It may look true from a certain point of view. But things change very fast. A while ago, bankers thought they were immune to disruption in their industry.
Does anyone have statistics on the impact of robocallers? They're ubiquitous and universally obnoxious. I haven't seen any reporting on their effectiveness for the services they're advertising for. I wonder why do they even bother.
I understand these calls mostly take advantage of unsuspecting people, but I still can't imagine the impact these calls are making financially.
