21–30 of 314 posts
Wow things are moving super fast, but it's scary that everything is being tainted by licensing. Super fun for research, but commercial endeavors are on shady grounds.
I wonder if when you train a model based on the weights of another model, do the owners of the original model have any sort of copyright claim? They trained it on data on which they had no copyright claim either, fwiw.
What kind of copyright claims can be made against the content generated by a model wielding the desired weights?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hopefully someone will be brave enough to fight Meta on the LLaMA copyright issue. My concern is that the people who can afford a massive legal battle can also afford to train their own model.
Given recent guidance from the US Copyright Office, I doubt there are real copyright issues or enforceable restrictions on commercial use. I would say that someone trying to sell the original model would be the only case that could have a real challenge, and even then its not that clear cut to me. Everyone else using these fine tuned models, I don't think there is a case. Everyone's making non-copyrightable scaffoldi…
As far as I know, USPTO has said that works crested primarily by AI may not receive copyright protection, but I don’t think there’s any indication that the software to run AI is not copyrightable. Maybe?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if when you train a model based on the weights of another model, do the owners of the original model have any sort of copyright claim? They trained it on data on which they had no copyright claim either, fwiw.
Why bother with the weights when you can just take the literal output of another model and consume as part of your training corpus? What kind of copyright claims can be made against the content generated by a model wielding the desired weights?
There might be other ways of transfer-learning where you can greatly benefit from the pretrained weights, some of which may have not yet been discovered.
Wow things are moving super fast, but it's scary that everything is being tainted by licensing. Super fun for research, but commercial endeavors are on shady grounds.
Da Vinci had no licenses. Nor Euclid, Nor Einstein. In the long run, licenses are for losers.
> Note: the full model on GPU (16GB of RAM required) performs much better in our qualitative evaluations.
Is there a download for a trained full model?
Does anyone know of any good test suites we can use to benchmark these local models? It would be really interesting to compare all the ones capable of running on consumer hardware so that users can easily choose the best ones to use. Currently, I'm a bit unsure how this compares to the Alpaca model released a few weeks ago.
It is instantly clear how strong the model is relative to GPT-4.
Does anyone know of any good test suites we can use to benchmark these local models? It would be really interesting to compare all the ones capable of running on consumer hardware so that users can easily choose the best ones to use. Currently, I'm a bit unsure how this compares to the Alpaca model released a few weeks ago.
Instead, I strongly recommend to put together a list of "control questions" of your own, that covers the general, and specific use cases you're interested in. Specifically, I'd recommend adding questions on topics you have high degree of expertise on; and topics where you can figure out what "expert" answer actually looks like; then run it against the available models by yourself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if when you train a model based on the weights of another model, do the owners of the original model have any sort of copyright claim? They trained it on data on which they had no copyright claim either, fwiw.
Why bother with the weights when you can just take the literal output of another model and consume as part of your training corpus? What kind of copyright claims can be made against the content generated by a model wielding the desired weights?