Llama and ChatGPT Are Not Open-Source

Of note, if you're interested in helping participate in the discussion of what an open source AI would actually look like, the Open Source Initiative is looking for your help:

https://opensource.org/deepdive/

Re: Llama and ChatGPT Are Not Open-Source

#5

Post by version_five » Thu, Jul 27, 2023, 10:05 PM UTC

smoldesu wrote: post #2

Previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36820122 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36806536 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36791671 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36783019

To be fair, the title is the same but this article is really about a study of the openness characteristics of different AI models, which is new. This link had the comparison of different models: https://opening-up-chatgpt.github.io/

Re: Llama and ChatGPT Are Not Open-Source

#6

Post by version_five » Thu, Jul 27, 2023, 10:09 PM UTC

jehb wrote: post #4

Of note, if you're interested in helping participate in the discussion of what an open source AI would actually look like, the Open Source Initiative is looking for your help: https://opensource.org/deepdive/

In there somewhere in there where they are asking for input? It presents itself that way but it seems the only way to "help" is to propose a presentation under their call for speakers: https://sessionize.com/deepdiveai

Is there another way to contribute?

Re: Llama and ChatGPT Are Not Open-Source

#7

Post by hprotagonist » Thu, Jul 27, 2023, 10:09 PM UTC

littlestymaar wrote: post #3

Can we please stop using terminology related to code for something that's not code?

sometimes it’s hard to see a difference.

Re: Llama and ChatGPT Are Not Open-Source

#8

Post by aaur0 » Thu, Jul 27, 2023, 10:11 PM UTC

littlestymaar wrote: post #3

Can we please stop using terminology related to code for something that's not code?

Exactly - I wrote something on similar lines here : https://medium.com/@anandandbeyond/rethinking-open-source-fo...

Re: Llama and ChatGPT Are Not Open-Source

#9

Post by bick_nyers » Thu, Jul 27, 2023, 10:13 PM UTC

I personally do not want the companies to release training data (at least for a while) because then it gives people leverage to neuter it.

I don't want a sanitized LLM, and I don't have $60M lying around to train my own.

Copyrighted material, sexual content, political opinions, throw it all in and release it please!

Yes, reducing bias in the models is a noble goal, but introducing new bias and blindspots to do it is a no-no.

Maybe I just got added to a list somewhere for having this opinion.

Re: Llama and ChatGPT Are Not Open-Source

#10

Post by version_five » Thu, Jul 27, 2023, 10:18 PM UTC

bick_nyers wrote: post #9

I personally do not want the companies to release training data (at least for a while) because then it gives people leverage to neuter it. I don't want a sanitized LLM, and I don't have $60M lying around to train my own. Copyrighted material, sexual content, political opinions, throw it all in and release it please! Yes, reducing bias in the models is a noble goal, but introducing new bias and blindspots to do it is…

100% agree. People that want training data released mostly just want to find something to attack, it has nothing to do with transparency.