Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jfdlsjfd" data-source="post: 9834500" data-attributes="member: 42856">There are a lot of ways to express your idea, and you chose to be insulting. I'll not interact with you further as a result.For the other readers, who might have been confused about my point, I wanted to say that infrastructure built to train model is built and won't disappear, lessening the (still very high, due to maintenance and energy) cost of trying to create an effective model. I wasn't discounting operational costs, of course. For example, one of the problem datacenter owners meet in the US is the power grid and the necessary investment will be one-off (for decades). Once Google has built its planned nuclear power plants to power its datacenters, they won't go poof tomorrow even if Google goes bankrupt. Also, deeply depressed compute price will reflect on the price of training runs, which are already lower than they were a few years back. Deepseek R1 training cost was "only" 5 millions, and Google's Gemini 79 millions. Mistral, as a company, probably never had the means to spend even a single billion and produced a large number of models. Are they leading the market like billions-spending OpenAI by training models on a mere 24k GPU when the leaders have much, much more? No, they're trailing slightly behind, but they simply take more time. Even if the financial incentive to build many new concurrent datacenters is deeply lessened, it will probably slow the rate of model production, but not make new labs unable to enter the field.And while one may question the financial sense of building further models and bearing those costs, most of the research and high quality models are provided by universities (as [USER=23751]@Maxperson[/USER] put it, China will do it) without a clear monetization goal. I'm also sure a few sovereign countries could be interested in a LLM listening to every phone calls and emails and reporting citizens with uncompliant thoughts, even if there is no money to be made with that. Unfortunately, I am also convinced that those same actors will not be put off by the occasional upright citizen being attributed hallucinated faults.Which has no bearing on the cost to run the model once it is working. And the article we're speaking of postulated that we're already there for the use case he mentionned. So no more investment needed anyway.</blockquote>

Verification