Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Meta to release open-source commercial AI model

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 168 posts

Re: Meta to release open-source commercial AI model

#11

Post by thatguymike »

Jeff_Brown wrote: post #2

What's the monetization model here? Is this a closed-source version of their open-source model? (That's suggested by the phrase in the article, "a commercial version of LLaMA, its open-source large language model".)

Commoditize Your Complement, it’s a strategic play since Meta is behind on LLMs.

Re: Meta to release open-source commercial AI model

#13

Post by Roark66 »

Jeff_Brown wrote: post #2

What's the monetization model here? Is this a closed-source version of their open-source model? (That's suggested by the phrase in the article, "a commercial version of LLaMA, its open-source large language model".)

Well, if they really released it as open source, I guess depending on the exact license a company that modifies(fine tunes) it and wants to make money on that modified version would have to distribute the weights and/or disclose the details about how they fine tuned it. On what data etc. By offering a commercial license , the buyer can do anything they want.

Re: Meta to release open-source commercial AI model

#14

Post by CharlesW »

Jeff_Brown wrote: post #2

What's the monetization model here? Is this a closed-source version of their open-source model? (That's suggested by the phrase in the article, "a commercial version of LLaMA, its open-source large language model".)

> What's the monetization model here?

There doesn't necessarily have to be one. Facebook's goal may be to help commoditize its complements. https://gwern.net/complement

Re: Meta to release open-source commercial AI model

#15

Post by dundun »

Jeff_Brown wrote: post #2

What's the monetization model here? Is this a closed-source version of their open-source model? (That's suggested by the phrase in the article, "a commercial version of LLaMA, its open-source large language model".)

Google opensourced Tensorflow because they believed it would help with the hiring process: if researchers could use the same framework to do their PhDs as Google used in their production systems, that was seen as an advantage.

Maybe that's Meta's play here? Maybe the idea is that the ecosystem around a model could be as valuable or more valuable than the model itself too, so an OSS model could benefit Meta a lot more by gaining more of the ecosystem mind share?

Or Maybe Yann LeCun is just a hippie that dreams of free love, hard drugs and open-source models?

Re: Meta to release open-source commercial AI model

#18

Post by andy99 »

Jeff_Brown wrote: post #2

What's the monetization model here? Is this a closed-source version of their open-source model? (That's suggested by the phrase in the article, "a commercial version of LLaMA, its open-source large language model".)

LLaMA is already in it's way to becoming an industry standard (in my opinion, look at llama.cpp plus everything build on LLaMA). There are benefits to being able to set direction like that. Same as pytorch for example, it's not just about direct revenue it's about everyone building on and contributing to your platform.

They might have done well to make gg an offer he couldn't refuse and take on ggml and llama.cpp as an open source project.

Re: Meta to release open-source commercial AI model

#20

Post by fullshark »

pueblito wrote: post #4
Jeff_Brown wrote: post #2

What's the monetization model here? Is this a closed-source version of their open-source model? (That's suggested by the phrase in the article, "a commercial version of LLaMA, its open-source large language model".)

I think the strategy is more to prevent competitors from monetizing

That's a huge reason to do it also, but it also makes sense if you have researchers + developers improving the engine of something that powers your product. The moat / competitive advantage at FB is their network, not so much the proprietary underlying tech.
Post reply on HN