2026-04-17 11:35 UTC
Replies (5)
-
@lyralycan@sh.itjust.works 2026-04-17 12:01
If you run your own AI and watch how long it takes, how much it runs up the resources for a few seconds, then you might get an idea of what it's like hosting at least three copies of a multi-terabyte LLM, in memory, with much shorter response and a much bigger knowledge base (Gemini by Google), taking millions of prompts per minute. Then think of every company that's hosting major public AI services. Then remember that the *only* things good that come out of AI are natural language inference for voice commands and *slightly* improved developer processes. Hosting it is just a reminder of the rapid environmental, ecological and cultural destruction that is the AI bubble. In summary: *Perhaps*, if the hoster wants it for streamlining their dev process. Otherwise it can be replaced with a far more efficient standard algorithmic program, which is what we had before.
-
@varnia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2026-04-17 13:04
Criticism on LLMs has two angles: - Data usage and energy cost while running it - this you would have under control when selfhosting - Training of the LLM: You have no control over how the LLM was trained - not which data sources were used, the forkforce that cleaned up the data or the amount and type of energy used to do so
-
@WesternInfidels@feddit.online 2026-04-17 12:10
Maybe, maybe not. The question I have is: How is this the best way for a non-profit to shape and steward the open web?
-
@the_riviera_kid@lemmy.world 2026-04-17 11:37
no
-
@XLE@piefed.social 2026-04-17 12:19
Mozilla is burning donation money on this entry into an already full market, it hooks into cloud models, and at best (if you download one instead) you'll be left with a wrapper around a closed-source binary made by a Big Tech corporation. **Don't donate to Mozilla, because this is where Mozilla donations go**. Google funds Firefox, donations (to MZLA) fund Thunderbird. Mozilla Foundation funds get sunk into this.