When comparing LLaMA 3.1 and GPT-4 (ChatGPT) for coding and programming tasks, several key factors need to be considered, including performance, specialization, and adaptability.
But, trying it, I got to see that Llama 3.1 405B outperforms GPT-4 , but it underperforms GPT-4 on multilingual (Hindi, Spanish, and Portuguese) prompts.
Even for the problem solving tasks the response and corrected o/p was accurate compared to gpt 4.
Llama 3 and GPT-4 are both powerful tools for coding and problem-solving, but they cater to different needs. If you prioritize accuracy and efficiency in coding tasks, Llama 3 might be the better choice. However, if you need assistance with creative tasks like writing code comments or generating documentation, GPT-4âs strengths shine. Ultimately, the choice depends on your specific requirements and preferences.
Seems, Meta isnât playing.
Do you know what data they used to train the model? They pretend to be open-source but only shared the story, not the datasetsâŚ
- Do they assume nothing will happen when some âpatterns they forgot as a backdoorâ are exploited in the model?
- Do you trust Mark Z. after Cambridge Analytica?
- I am not sure how many fans of Zuck will throw $8,000 - $10,000 just to use the open-source model that might break and cause leaks.
- My personal opinion, the model should be called sheps3 not llama3, sheps with long necks.
Damn! Seems like u have hold lot grudge against Zuck.
Though u raised valid points about the importance of access to training data and the need for accountability.
Regarding the trust in Meta and Mark Zuckerberg, itâs understandable to have reservations given the past controversies like Cambridge Analytica.
I appreciate your humor about the modelâs name, and âSheps3â does have a nice ring to it!
Ultimately, whether to use Llama 3.1 over ChatGPT-4 for coding and programming will depend on individual needs, trust in the platform, and the specific use case.
Thank you for sharing your perspective!
Just to be clear, I donât have any grudges against Mark Zuckerberg or Meta. My main concern is the risks associated with open-source models.
- These models can be reverse-engineered and potentially used for harmful purposes, leading to leaks if theyâre used in production.
- They could be exploited to create compounds, provide information for cyber attacks, and more. Itâs crucial to acknowledge the real threats and the damage they could cause.
Who will take responsibility for the potential harm? Promoting models without discussing these risks is reckless.
Thanks for the discussion.
Blockquote Absolutely true guys
TrueâŚ
Seems like meta will have to hold another fatality against congress!