Thread

1. _8L34K · 1790863104 · focus · HN ↗

   "Meta is claiming that the costly A.I. computer chips it buys from companies, including Nvidia, are entitled to a taxpayer-provided discount as part of the experiment."

   Why do these schemes always involves these private companies siphoning money from taxpayers? It's "communism" (or whatever) to subsidize public health, yet we are expected to subsidize experimental AI companies.

   1. treis · 1790863308 · focus · HN ↗

      We aren't expected to. We (or our elected representatives) passed a law saying that experimental spending gets tax breaks. And I don't really see an argument that LLMs aren't in an experimental phase.

      1. danny_codes · 1790867669 · focus · HN ↗

         I mean this is clearly a huge stretch. Presumably the intent of this law is to incentivize novel innovation. In this case we incentivize nothing. Data centers are commodities.

         1. treis · 1790872224 · focus · HN ↗

            LLMs are not and Llama did pretty much exactly what this type of program encourages. It was a pilot that made no money, was thrown away, and spurred a ton of independent research.

            This is also a weird split brain with HN. Half the front page is mocking companies for throwing away money on AI. That Chinese models (which surely got a huge boost from LLaMa) are going to render all this investment a gigantic loss.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.