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

VibeVoice: Open-source frontier voice AI

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 191 posts

Re: VibeVoice: Open-source frontier voice AI

#121

Post by jrm4 »

hedora wrote: post #91
jrm4 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, as I said elsewhere, maybe let's just let "open-source" have it. "Open-source" can be "anything you can go out and grab a copy of and use" but doesn't give you much legal certainty about any of it, and reserve "free software" for the other, better thing.

But, free software lost it's way around GPLv3. From the end user's perspective, GPLv3 says that you can only use the software if it's either a cloud service, on hypothetical open firmware devices, or if you install it yourself. AGPLv3 partially solves the issue by blocking people like Google from using it to build proprietary cloud services that take away their users' freedom. (It still doesn't solve the problem wher…

I don't understand this either. The GPL doesn't address end users and their use of software at all, to be technical. It only addresses what terms of copyright redistributors of GPLed software are allowed to apply in-turn to subsequent end users.

Re: VibeVoice: Open-source frontier voice AI

#124

Post by engeljohnb »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #19
maxloh wrote: post #14

I think we should stop calling this type of models open source. They are indeed "open weight." The training code is proprietary and never revealed. https://github.com/microsoft/VibeVoice/issues/102

> we should stop calling this type of model open source. They are indeed "open weight” This ship has sailed. It’s now in the same category as hacker/cracker and the pronunciation of GIF.

The inventor of GIF didn't begin with a document* clearly laying out what is and isn't to be called a "GIF."

I think it's right to push back whenever a huge tech corporation tries to build goodwill by falsely using terms like "open source."

*https://opensource.org/osd

Re: VibeVoice: Open-source frontier voice AI

#127

Post by hedora »

jrm4 wrote: post #121
hedora wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But, free software lost it's way around GPLv3. From the end user's perspective, GPLv3 says that you can only use the software if it's either a cloud service, on hypothetical open firmware devices, or if you install it yourself. AGPLv3 partially solves the issue by blocking people like Google from using it to build proprietary cloud services that take away their users' freedom. (It still doesn't solve the problem wher…

I don't understand this either. The GPL doesn't address end users and their use of software at all, to be technical. It only addresses what terms of copyright redistributors of GPLed software are allowed to apply in-turn to subsequent end users.

The point of the Free in free software was always to protect the users of the software, not the vendors or the redistributors. (This is why the license focuses on the redistributors -- the mechanisms of the license limit their rights in order to protect others' rights.)

The first sentence of the GNU manifesto says this, and a few sections later in the document elaborate on the point:

https://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html

Note, in particular, footnote [1] which explains that its OK for distributors to ask for payment, but that it's never OK for users to have to ask for permission to use the software, and the section "Why I Must Write GNU".

Since then, software service monopolies became common, and all of the most end-user-hostile systems on earth rely heavily on the GNU system. At this point, we're paying for permission to use those services with our money, our data, our democracy, etc.

I certainly cannot give you permission to use any of the GPLed services that I have used, or that I've been paid to extend. Therefore, I say the free software movement has lost its way.

Re: VibeVoice: Open-source frontier voice AI

#128

Post by JumpCrisscross »

engeljohnb wrote: post #124
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we should stop calling this type of model open source. They are indeed "open weight” This ship has sailed. It’s now in the same category as hacker/cracker and the pronunciation of GIF.

The inventor of GIF didn't begin with a document* clearly laying out what is and isn't to be called a "GIF." I think it's right to push back whenever a huge tech corporation tries to build goodwill by falsely using terms like "open source." * https://opensource.org/osd

> inventor of GIF didn't begin with a document clearly laying out what is and isn't to be called a "GIF”*

Neither did the inventors of AI. A third party published a document after corporations went with open weights = open source and a spoiler block in FOSS wanted all training data published.

> it's right to push back whenever a huge tech corporation tries to build goodwill by falsely using terms like "open source

I think it’s counterproductive. Most people only see a squabble, which makes any ensuing points from the open-source community seem silly. Those who care can continue using the more-precise language they choose to.

Put another way, there is a difference between using terms like cracker and fully spelling out cryptocurrency, and telling people who use hacker and crypto more loosely that they’re wrong. They aren’t wrong and that isn’t meaningful feedback. At the same time, the person using the precise language isn’t wrong either.

Re: VibeVoice: Open-source frontier voice AI

#130

Post by zuzululu »

steinvakt2 wrote: post #10

This is not a new model. Also, it hallucinates a lot. Also, it's very heavy and slow in inference. It's also bad in multilingual. Edit: I'm talking purely about speech to text (STT). Not sure about the other things this can do.

you saved us a lot of time here.... i unstarred the repo

moving on....

Post reply on HN