←back to thread

Yann LeCun to depart Meta and launch AI startup focused on 'world models'

(www.nasdaq.com)
760 points MindBreaker2605 | 8 comments | 12 Nov 25 07:25 UTC | HN request time: 1.872s | source | bottom
Show context
sebmellen ◴[12 Nov 25 07:57 UTC] No.45897467[source]▶
Making LeCun report to Wang was the most boneheaded move imaginable. But… I suppose Zuckerberg knows what he wants, which is AI slopware and not truly groundbreaking foundation models.
replies(20): >>45897481 #>>45897498 #>>45897518 #>>45897885 #>>45897970 #>>45897978 #>>45898040 #>>45898053 #>>45898092 #>>45898108 #>>45898186 #>>45898539 #>>45898651 #>>45898727 #>>45899160 #>>45899375 #>>45900884 #>>45900885 #>>45901421 #>>45903451 #
xuancanh ◴[12 Nov 25 08:55 UTC] No.45897885[source]▶
In industry research, someone in a chief position like LeCun should know how to balance long-term research with short-term projects. However, for whatever reason, he consistently shows hostility toward LLMs and engineering projects, even though Llama and PyTorch are two of the most influential projects from Meta AI. His attitude doesn’t really match what is expected from a Chief position at a product company like Facebook. When Llama 4 got criticized, he distanced himself from the project, stating that he only leads FAIR and that the project falls under a different organization. That kind of attitude doesn’t seem suitable for the face of AI at the company. It's not a surprise that Zuck tried to demote him.
replies(13): >>45897942 #>>45898142 #>>45898331 #>>45898661 #>>45898893 #>>45899157 #>>45899354 #>>45900094 #>>45900130 #>>45900230 #>>45901443 #>>45901631 #>>45902275 #
blutoot ◴[12 Nov 25 10:55 UTC] No.45898661[source]▶
These are the types that want academic freedom in a cut-throat industry setup and conversely never fit into academia because their profiles and growth ambitions far exceed what an academic research lab can afford (barring some marquee names). It's an unfortunate paradox.
replies(3): >>45898951 #>>45899099 #>>45902308 #
sigbottle ◴[12 Nov 25 11:41 UTC] No.45898951[source]▶
Maybe it's time for Bell Labs 2?

I guess everyone is racing towards AGI in a few years or whatever so it's kind of impossible to cultivate that environment.

replies(13): >>45899122 #>>45899204 #>>45899373 #>>45899504 #>>45899663 #>>45899866 #>>45900147 #>>45900934 #>>45900995 #>>45901066 #>>45902188 #>>45902731 #>>45905111 #
belter ◴[12 Nov 25 12:02 UTC] No.45899122[source]▶
> I guess everyone is racing towards AGI in a few years

A pipe dream sustaining the biggest stock market bubble in history. Smart investors are jumping to the next bubble already...Quantum...

replies(1): >>45899178 #
1. re-thc ◴[12 Nov 25 12:08 UTC] No.45899178[source]▶
> A pipe dream sustaining the biggest stock market bubble in history

This is why we're losing innovation.

Look at electric cars, batteries, solar panels, rare earths and many more. Bubble or struggle for survival? Right, because if US has no AI the world will have no AI? That's the real bubble - being stuck in an ancient world view.

Meta's stock has already tanked for "over" investing in AI. Bubble, where?

replies(1): >>45899194 #
2. belter ◴[12 Nov 25 12:10 UTC] No.45899194[source]▶
2 Trillion dollars in Capex to get code generators with hallucinations, that run at a loss, and you ask where is the Bubble?
replies(1): >>45899264 #
3. re-thc ◴[12 Nov 25 12:19 UTC] No.45899264[source]▶
> 2 Trillion dollars in Capex to get code generators with hallucinations

You assume that's the only use of it.

And are people not using these code generators?

Is this an issue with a lost generation that forgot what Capex is? We've moved from Capex to Opex and now the notion is lost, is it? You can hire an army of software developers but can't build hardware.

Is it better when everyone buys DeepSeek or a non-US version? Well then you don't need to spend Capex but you won't have revenue either.

replies(1): >>45899333 #
4. littlestymaar ◴[12 Nov 25 12:29 UTC] No.45899333{3}[source]▶
Deepseek somehow didn't need $2T to happen.
replies(3): >>45899379 #>>45900047 #>>45900088 #
5. re-thc ◴[12 Nov 25 12:33 UTC] No.45899379{4}[source]▶
Because you know how much they spent.

And that $2T you're referring to includes infrastructure like energy, data centers, servers and many things. DeepSeek rents from others. Someone is paying.

6. anotherd1p ◴[12 Nov 25 13:41 UTC] No.45900047{4}[source]▶
all that led up to Deepseek needed more. don't forget where it all comes from.
7. matt3D ◴[12 Nov 25 13:45 UTC] No.45900088{4}[source]▶
I think the argument can be made that Deepseek is a state sponsored needle looking to pop another states bubble.

If Deepseek is free it undermines the value of LLMs, so the value of these US companies is mainly speculation/FOMO over AGI.

replies(1): >>45900589 #
8. re-thc ◴[12 Nov 25 14:25 UTC] No.45900589{5}[source]▶
> the argument can be made that Deepseek is a state sponsored needle looking to pop another states bubble

Who says they don't make money? Same with open source software that offer a hosted version.

> If Deepseek is free it undermines the value of LLMs, so the value of these US companies is mainly speculation/FOMO over AGI

Freemium, open source and other models all exist. Does it undermine the value of e.g. Salesforce?