i was wondering why meta has such a hard time with llm development

its the organisational goal of that endeavour

they are doing it in a phase of firing people

so the goal of llm at meta is "to make people redundant" and no matter of HR/PR speak can change it

antrophic and openai have the goal "lets create the future"

whomever they hire and no matter how much money they spend on it, the goal alone will create very different outcomes.

Here’s a personal story from back when I was at Meta that should tell you everything you need to know about how things get built and shipped there.

I was working on a service that was a bit of a disaster. Terrible reliability, performance issues, needlessly complex and brittle code, outages all the time. And this was something that everyone using Facebook or IG directly interacts with. My first couple months were spent desperately trying to get it back in order.

Once when I was in the middle of a SEV-1 my manager set up a meeting and said “you have been doing great work on the operational side, but we already have enough to put in that bucket on your PSC. Stop working on this for the rest of the half and ship one of <useless projects> instead, otherwise I won’t be able to save you in the next review.”

I realized then that I had wrongly thought the team was collectively responsible for ensuring a good user experience, when really everyone at the company is individually responsible for ensuring their own success.

The goal of all companies is to make more money. Nobody likes getting rid of people, actual people (managers) have to do it, and they hate doing it.

It's possible that a lot of people get laid off because of AI, but it's also possible that Javin's paradox kicks in and employment goes up. Nobody knows yet, but I hope for the positive outcome.

> antrophic and openai have the goal "lets create the future"

Thanks for the laugh, I needed it.

They all do it for the same reason: to make a lot of money by selling it to companies who want to cut labor costs.