We've been using Torch for a while at work, really appreciate Facebook doing this. Some of us had a hard time adjusting to Lua, but it was well worth it.
Torch is really cool. I wish I could use it more. Sadly it isn't supported on Windows.
Facebook open-sources deep-learning modules
61–70 of 76 posts
Re: Facebook open-sources deep-learning modules
#62Sadly, this has facebook's new, horrible patent clause. For those who aren't aware, it says 1. If facebook sues you, and you counterclaim over patents (whether about software or not), you will lose rights under all these patent grants. So essentially you can't defend yourself. This is different than the typical apache style patent grant, which instead would say "if you sue me over patents in apache licensed software…
As long as you're doing your training offline and shipping the resulting learned models, I don't see this is a big risk. If you're planning on shipping software that can learn online, then sure, use something else for that, or ask for a better deal from FB.
I wonder what would happen if every company offered patented algorithms under these terms. Still wouldn't stop patent trolls, I'd guess.
Re: Facebook open-sources deep-learning modules
#63I appreciate that Facebook open-sources their libraries, but they have an awful habit of dumping source code on Github and then continuing to develop it internally without pushing those changes back out. For example, Facebook open-sourced Thrift, then proceeded to develop it internally, and recently released out a fork of thrift, not merging anything back into the original tree. Likewise, they open-sourced Corona a f…
Agree that their stewardship has been lacking (especially in comparison to say Apache, Docker, etc), but for research code this is a pretty nice release in terms of the scope of problems solved. For research it's more important to have an implementation of what worked (and what /didn't/) than a polished solution + well-kept community because a lot of the current code will probably get thrown away eventually anyways. The service here is research done rather than software provided.
Re: Facebook open-sources deep-learning modules
#64Does anyone know what Facebook is using the AI for?
To further personalise the user feed.
Re: Facebook open-sources deep-learning modules
#65Sadly, this has facebook's new, horrible patent clause. For those who aren't aware, it says 1. If facebook sues you, and you counterclaim over patents (whether about software or not), you will lose rights under all these patent grants. So essentially you can't defend yourself. This is different than the typical apache style patent grant, which instead would say "if you sue me over patents in apache licensed software…
I understand the concern. For reference, what are the worst patents that Facebook owns? Do they own patents that should not have been granted?
Re: Facebook open-sources deep-learning modules
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, it depends, you can definitely have servers with NVidia hardware, and you don't need to have all of them with it. (Amazon offers GPGPU servers on EC2 for example)
Amazon only offers very costly Tesla and Quadro cards on their GPGPUs. Super expensive. For scale, if you do not need the extra memory on the Tesla cards, what you want is commodity NVIDIA GeForce cards that are a fraction of the cost.
Standard cards are handicapped for double precision operations though (1/8 speed afaik).
Re: Facebook open-sources deep-learning modules
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amazon only offers very costly Tesla and Quadro cards on their GPGPUs. Super expensive. For scale, if you do not need the extra memory on the Tesla cards, what you want is commodity NVIDIA GeForce cards that are a fraction of the cost.
Standard cards are handicapped for double precision operations though (1/8 speed afaik).
You don't need double precision for typical DL tasks, such as training a convnet.
Re: Facebook open-sources deep-learning modules
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amazon only offers very costly Tesla and Quadro cards on their GPGPUs. Super expensive. For scale, if you do not need the extra memory on the Tesla cards, what you want is commodity NVIDIA GeForce cards that are a fraction of the cost.
Standard cards are handicapped for double precision operations though (1/8 speed afaik).
Double precision is overrated :) (at least for ML)
Re: Facebook open-sources deep-learning modules
#69Sadly, this has facebook's new, horrible patent clause. For those who aren't aware, it says 1. If facebook sues you, and you counterclaim over patents (whether about software or not), you will lose rights under all these patent grants. So essentially you can't defend yourself. This is different than the typical apache style patent grant, which instead would say "if you sue me over patents in apache licensed software…
As I read it is basically says you can use Facebook's patents unless you turn around and sue them in which case the deal's off. I'm not sure it's that awful - I mean how many companies are planing to use Facebook's patents and then sue them?
Re: Facebook open-sources deep-learning modules
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You make your important software dependent on this software. Congrats, facebook can now sue you with impunity because you can't afford to lose these patents. I have been rattling the clause jawns posted around in my head, and I cannot see this. I agree that the clause is onerous and I would not incorporate software that had such a clause into one of my products without a backup plan. I do not see how this gives Fac…
First, The only thing most companies have they could use against facebook, if facebook were to sue them, are patents. Second, "saying, "We don't actually infringe that" does not trigger this clause." This is false. Such a claim is a claim that facebook's patent claim is unenforceable against you. This falls directly into the "unenforceable" language. Also note that you claim it requires lawsuits. Actually, as worded,…
> First, The only thing most companies have they could use against facebook, if facebook were to sue them, are patents.
Facebook sues me for stealing proprietary information after hiring one of their engineers. I have no patents. How do patents help me?
> This is false. Such a claim is a claim that facebook's patent claim is unenforceable against you. This falls directly into the "unenforceable" language.
It is not false. Claiming a patent is unenforceable is not the same as claiming something you are doing in a specific case is not covered by a patent. "Unenforceable" has a specific legal definition.[1] The list of common actions that argue unenforceability: patent is invalid; inequitable conduct by patentee; delay in braining suit for infringement; patent misuse. Please explain how "our product doesn't infringe this patent" meets this definition.
> Also note that you claim it requires lawsuits. Actually, as worded, it does not.
I did not state that it requires lawsuits. You claimed the clause grants Facebook the ability to sue with impunity, and I was using the clauses to refute that statement in that context. I am well aware that the clause, as written, does not require lawsuits.
[1] http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/patent-infring...