Yeah, a good rule of thumb is that the weights take up ~100% of the size of the model, so 100B bytes (8-bit quant) would be, well, 100GB and a 4-bit quant would be half that.
Right. The rule of thumb is that the overhead size of the model that's not the weights is so vastly outweighed by the actual number of weights that it can be disregarded. My shorthand for that was to write "the weights take up ~100% of the size of the model". What then "follows", both in the sense that the explanation is written after the rule as well as that it logically follows, is that, well, 100 billion bytes is, you know, 100 GB. I don't see why you're, like, paying so much attention to this?
Right. That's, well, not a rule of thumb. Asking how much of a bottle of water is, well, water, and someone says "well, a good rule of thumb is that it's all water", is just an answer. You don't need an estimate when, well, there is nothing to estimate.
Anyway, more seriously, I hope it's obvious by now that I don't particularly care that my means of communication is so offensive to you. I think you should, like, cry a river, build a bridge, then, well... get over it, you know?
And on the, er, "topic"? A rule of thumb for me does not have to be one for you, even if it's explicitly presented as such a rule. I thought that would be obvious but, well, here we are. Anyway, how's life been treating you?
At this point, what isn't much of an estimation anymore is that you are here to explain things that nobody's asked for, and like to assume people around you have been waiting for your pearls of wisdom. You're unable to realize when this isn't so. You're so full of yourself that you don't notice.
Also, in this particular thread, you started by wrongly making a correction of something that was clearly not an error, nor a wrong use of words, not even a misspelling. The problem is you started to post a correction before realizing that you didn't read right. That happens when one is more eager to boast one's own greatness than one is interested in the topic at hand. The result is that in this thread, you were clearly, as a rule of thumb, well, 100% wrong.
I understand that's you're frustrated from some deeply held software beliefs not holding up to examination, but making things up in a different thread is not a healthy way to work towards acceptance.
