[HN Gopher] Introducing the Llama Startup Program
___________________________________________________________________
Introducing the Llama Startup Program
Author : mayalilpony10
Score : 138 points
Date : 2025-05-21 16:10 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (ai.meta.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (ai.meta.com)
| adamloving wrote:
| Quick summary: Apply for up to $6K reimbursement per month for up
| to 6 months for Llama usage (wherever you use it). Incorporated
| startups with less than $10 million USD in funding are eligible.
| (disclosure: I work at Meta as Llama Partner Engineer)
| bix6 wrote:
| Is this pure reimbursement or are there any strings attached?
| joshuanapoli wrote:
| The 6k is only for AI cloud hosting.
|
| > Join us for the opportunity to receive cloud reimbursements
| of up to $6,000 USD per month for up to six months, technical
| resources, and a vibrant community
| YetAnotherNick wrote:
| Does this just apply to API cost or finetuning/hosting on prem
| cost?
| teruakohatu wrote:
| > disclosure: I work at Meta as Llama Partner Engineer
|
| Do you know of any programmes for Tertiary Education
| initiatives?
| kjok wrote:
| > Employ at least one developer
|
| What kind of developer? full/part-time or 1099 contractor?
| lostmsu wrote:
| Do I count as the founder? I use contractors from Eastern
| Europe to do frontend, does that count?
|
| Overall seems like a very niche offering, considering $6K is
| peanuts these days. You can get more by applying for any of
| Microsoft, Google, or Amazon startup programs. MSFT for
| instance straight up gives > $100K in cloud credits when you
| are funded (and if not, how do you pay your developer?)
| theanonymousone wrote:
| Hi! Does it have to be a legally incorporated company?
| dbbk wrote:
| What is a non-legally incorporated company?
| valleyer wrote:
| An unincorporated association or sole proprietorship, for
| example.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unincorporated_association
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sole_proprietorship
| paxys wrote:
| You literally linked to something called
| "unincorporated".
| valleyer wrote:
| Yes. That's what the "does it have to be legally
| incorporated" question is implicitly contrasting with, by
| my reading. (Not against some putative "non-legally
| incorporated company".)
| ghaff wrote:
| A ton of one-person shops don't spend the effort and money
| to legally incorporate in some manner.
| maxloh wrote:
| How does this program, or the adoption of Llama in general,
| benefit Meta?
| BizarroLand wrote:
| If you come up with a great idea, then Facebook can either
| steal it from you or buy you out without them having to spend
| the funds to test all of the potential options.
|
| Facebook hasn't had a good idea for over a decade (and even
| that one was trash), so they need a little help now and
| again.
| concerndc1tizen wrote:
| > ... to receive cloud reimbursements of up to $6,000 USD per
| month for up to six months
| seunosewa wrote:
| Make a good model first. Then you can start pushing for usage.
| Llama 4 isn't even the best open source non-reasoning model.
| phillipcarter wrote:
| It is a good model, but I think my bar is to stop faking
| benchmarks first.
| littlestymaar wrote:
| What Llama4 model is good in your opinion?
| phillipcarter wrote:
| I've only used Scout, but I found it more than acceptable
| as a "GPT-4 or better" level model for coding questions.
| I've not stress tested it in any way because I didn't need
| to. So it's fine! It's just not special.
| maxloh wrote:
| > Llama 4 isn't even the best open source non-reasoning model.
|
| It isn't even open source. There is a 700 million monthly
| active users limit.
|
| https://huggingface.co/meta-llama/Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E-Inst...
| kouteiheika wrote:
| > There is a 700 million monthly active users limit.
|
| ...so? Who cares? Why does it matter if big megacorporations
| cannot use it for free? I sure as hell don't care.
|
| If you want to complain about the license a better target is
| the annoying advertising clause:
|
| > i. If you distribute or make available the Llama Materials
| (or any derivative works thereof), or a product or service
| (including another AI model) that contains any of them, you
| shall (A) provide a copy of this Agreement with any such
| Llama Materials; and (B) prominently display "Built with
| Llama" on a related website, user interface, blogpost, about
| page, or product documentation. If you use the Llama
| Materials or any outputs or results of the Llama Materials to
| create, train, fine tune, or otherwise improve an AI model,
| which is distributed or made available, you shall also
| include "Llama" at the beginning of any such AI model name.
| neilv wrote:
| Better hurry:
|
| > _Applications for the initial cohort close on May 30, 2025 at
| 6:00 pm PT._
| yellow_lead wrote:
| Nice, just a little over a week. I'm sure they'll get many
| great applications.
| paxys wrote:
| Takes more than a week to fill out a form with 3 text boxes?
| bjornsing wrote:
| Great natural filter for startup talent.
| ks2048 wrote:
| Does anyone know of a good list of similar programs (cloud
| credits for startups)?
| shooker435 wrote:
| Azure and GCP both offer startup credits if you're
| incorporated, more if you've raised funding or have revenue.
| Not sure about AWS.
| k__ wrote:
| _" for early-stage startups in the United States"_
| airylizard wrote:
| love it. any llm can be made to perform reliably and accurately
| which is the biggest pre-requisite when it comes to creating an
| "AI Agent". I think this gives people the opportunity to start
| somewhere because they can leverage multi-pass prompting
| frameworks like TSCE to scale:
| https://github.com/AutomationOptimization/tsce_demo. despite the
| fact that "llama isn't the best"
| moron4hire wrote:
| Our definitions of "reliable" and "accurate" must differ
| wildly.
| slowhand09 wrote:
| Waiting for an obligatory WinampAI post because... It Really
| Whips the Llama's Ass.
| rgbrgb wrote:
| > Funding + Support -> Apply for Llama Startup Program by May 30
| -> Vision
|
| Feels a little backwards, no? Perhaps should have consulted
| Gemini.
| Fomite wrote:
| This was my thought too. But somewhat revealing of the mindset
| involved in an awful lot of the AI "industry".
|
| First, start with a pile of money and the vague notion of an AI
| tool. Usefulness will come later, surely, definitely, before we
| run out of pile of money.
| busymom0 wrote:
| Unfortunately, limited to US only.
| maxloh wrote:
| How does this program, or the adoption of Llama in general,
| benefit Meta?
| reilly3000 wrote:
| I want to know the same thing, but the other day I heard an
| interesting stat that ChatGPT is the #4 top site by traffic,
| just behind Instagram and ahead of X. We mustn't let all of
| that attention go elsewhere shall we?
| I_am_tiberius wrote:
| This image in the article has a size of 3MB: https://scontent-
| vie1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.2365-6/499353575_...
| jjcm wrote:
| I'm surprised they're leveraging a png for it instead of webp
| or some other compression format. Mainly surprised that
| compression of blog assets isn't automated for them.
| flaviuspopan wrote:
| To confirm, an LLC with a solo dev wouldn't qualify?
| CSMastermind wrote:
| My company qualifies for their criteria but Llama has been so bad
| compared to actual frontier models it doesn't seem worth it.
|
| They should probably remove the restriction that you need to be
| incorporated and open it up to college students or something.
| lr1970 wrote:
| > and may help to fund their use of Llama models.
|
| I love open weight (and better open source) LLMs and wish Llama
| all the best! But God help Meta if they have to pay startups to
| entice them to use their open weights model.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-05-21 23:00 UTC)