llama-int8 VS llama-dl

If anyone is interested in running this at home, please follow the llama-int8 project [1]. LLM.int8() is a recent development allowing LLMs to run in half the memory without loss of performance [2]. Note that at the end of [2]'s abstract, the authors state "This result makes such models much more accessible, for example making it possible to use OPT-175B/BLOOM on a single server with consumer GPUs. We open-source our software." I'm very thankful we have researchers like this further democratizing access to this data and prying it out of the hands of the gatekeepers who wish to monetize it.

[1] https://github.com/tloen/llama-int8

[2] https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.07339

To add a bit more context, the code other people linked (https://github.com/tloen/llama-int8) assumes single GPU. So if you want to run it on 2x3090, you'll need to modify it a bit:

There seems to be some confusion here. Let me step in as someone who has gone through this.

My repo https://github.com/shawwn/llama-dl was taken down last March by Facebook. They asserted copyright over LLaMA, which is obviously bogus since it was trained on data they do not own the copyright to. I was bummed about this, but after I mentioned on HN that I was willing to fight Meta, an anonymous person named L contacted me and sent $20k of Monero to cover legal fees. I was also contacted by an amazing lawyer who wanted to represent me in this. I was absurdly fortunate on both counts.

He drafted a counternotice, we sent it, and then my repo was restored within a week or so.

GitHub had no choice in the matter. Legally this is a required process. Ditto for GitLab. Both are US companies.

When YouTube-dl was taken down some time ago by a DMCA, Nat went to bat and got it restored, and GitHub made some sort of pledge to cover legal fees associated with bogus takedown requests.

Here’s the shitty part for this particular situation. A case can be made that the emulator is for the purpose of circumventing copyright protection mechanisms. This, sadly, is a solid legal basis for issuing a lawful takedown, as much as we all absolutely despise that idea. It’s pretty clear cut; Nintendo doesn’t want Switch games to be run on non-Nintendo platforms, and the emulator seeks to enable Switch games to be run on any platform. Therefore, the intent of the emulator is to circumvent Nintendo’s protection mechanisms.

So where does this leave us? Well, the team can file a counternotice. GitLab will restore the repo. But that opens up the team to a lawsuit by Nintendo. And as much as I want to stand up to bullies, there’s a difference between standing up to a guy shoving a kid in a locker vs standing up to a Silverback gorilla charging at you. Nintendo’s legal history implies the latter.

Welcome to Nintendo pain. The Smash community has been dealing with Nintendo’s BS for decades now. They shut down tournaments that use emulators for Smash Melee. And no one can do anything, because it’s their legal right to do so.

Your philosophical argument is interesting, but what the op was saying was one of the linked repos in inaccessible due to DMCA: https://github.com/shawwn/llama-dl

So while what you say may be true the DMCA seems to have worth for these orgs because they can get code removed by the host, who is uninterested in litigating, and the repo owner likely is even less capable of litigating the DMCA.

Unfortunately as a tool of fear and legal gridlock DMCA has shown itself to be very useful to those with ill intent.

Here are some useful links: https://github.com/shawwn/llama-dl and https://rentry.org/llama-tard-v2#tips-and-tricks

Sure. You can get models with magnet link from here https://github.com/shawwn/llama-dl/

To get running, just follow these steps https://github.com/ggerganov/llama.cpp/#usage

https://rentry.org/llama-tard-v2#tips-and-tricks https://github.com/shawwn/llama-dl