[deleted]
Open source AI is the path forward
31–40 of 936 posts
Re: Open source AI is the path forward
#32"Eventually though, open source Linux gained popularity – initially because it allowed developers to modify its code however they wanted ..." I find the language around "open source AI" to be confusing. With "open source" there's usually "source" to open, right? As in, there is human legible code that can be read and modified by the user? If so, then how can current ML models be open source? They're very large matric…
None of Meta's models are "open source" in the FOSS sense, even the latest Llama 3.1. The license is restrictive. And no one has bothered to release their training data either.
This post is an ad and trying to paint these things as something they aren't.
Re: Open source AI is the path forward
#33Everyone complaining about not having data access: Remember that without meta you would have openai and anthropic and that's it. I'm really thankful they're releasing this, and the reason they can't release the data is obvious.
Re: Open source AI is the path forward
#34Another case of "open-washing". Llama is not available open source, under the common definition of open source, as the license doesn't allow for commercial re-use by default [0]. They provide their model, with weights and code, as "source available" and it looks like they allow for commercial use until a 700M monthly subscriber cap is surpassed. They also don't allow you to train other AI models with their model: """…
They cannot legally enforce this, because they don’t have the rights to the content they trained it on. Whoever’s willing to fund that court battle would likely win.
There’s a legal precedent that says hard work alone isn’t enough to guarantee copyright, i.e. it doesn’t matter that it took millions of dollars to train.
Re: Open source AI is the path forward
#35>In the early days of high-performance computing, the major tech companies of the day each invested heavily in developing their own closed source versions of Unix. Because they sold the resultant code and systems built on it for money... this is the gold miner saying that all shovels and jeans should be free. Am I happy Facebook open sources some of their code? Sure, I think it's good for everyone. Do I think they're…
The source-code to Ad tracking platform is useless to users.
At the end, it's actually Facebook doing the right thing (though they are known for being evil).
It's a bit of an irony.
The supposedly "good" and "open" people like Google or OpenAI, haven't given their model weights.
A bit like Microsoft became the company that actually supports the whole open-source ecosystem with GitHub.
Re: Open source AI is the path forward
#36Everyone complaining about not having data access: Remember that without meta you would have openai and anthropic and that's it. I'm really thankful they're releasing this, and the reason they can't release the data is obvious.
[deleted]
Re: Open source AI is the path forward
#37so that North Korea will create small call centers for cheaper, since they can get these models for free?
The article argues that the threat of foreign espionage is not solved by closing models.
> Some people argue that we must close our models to prevent China from gaining access to them, but my view is that this will not work and will only disadvantage the US and its allies. Our adversaries are great at espionage, stealing models that fit on a thumb drive is relatively easy, and most tech companies are far from operating in a way that would make this more difficult. It seems most likely that a world of only closed models results in a small number of big companies plus our geopolitical adversaries having access to leading models, while startups, universities, and small businesses miss out on opportunities.
Re: Open source AI is the path forward
#38"Eventually though, open source Linux gained popularity – initially because it allowed developers to modify its code however they wanted ..." I find the language around "open source AI" to be confusing. With "open source" there's usually "source" to open, right? As in, there is human legible code that can be read and modified by the user? If so, then how can current ML models be open source? They're very large matric…
None of Meta's models are "open source" in the FOSS sense, even the latest Llama 3.1. The license is restrictive. And no one has bothered to release their training data either. This post is an ad and trying to paint these things as something they aren't.
> no one has bothered to release their training data
If the FOSS community sets this as the benchmark for open source in respect of AI, they're going to lose control of the term. In most jurisdictions it would be illegal for the likes of Meta to release training data.
Re: Open source AI is the path forward
#39The irony of this letter being written by Mark Zuckerburg at Meta, while OpenAI continues to be anything but open, is richer than anyone could have imagined.
Re: Open source AI is the path forward
#40"open source AI" ... "open" ... "open" ....
And you can't even try it without an FB/IG account.
Zuck will never change.