• jarfil@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Inclusive models” would need to be larger.

    Right now people seem to prefer smaller quantized models, with whatever set of even smaller LoRAs on top, that make them output what they want… and only include more generic elements in the base model.

      • jarfil@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Are you ready to run a 100B FP64 parameter model? Or even a 10B FP32 one?

        Over time, I wouldn’t be surprised if 500B INT8 models became commonplace with neuromorphic RAM, but there’s still some time for that to happen.

          • jarfil@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            For more inclusive models, or for current ones? In order to add something, either the size has to grow, or something would need to get pushed out (content, or quality). 4GB models are already at the limit of usefulness, both DALLE3 and SDXL run at about 12B parameters, so to make them “more inclusive” they’d have to grow.

            • Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m saying SD 1.5 and SDXL capture the concepts just fine, it’s just during fine-tuning people train away some of the diversity.