Live data from Hacker News

Llama and ChatGPT Are Not Open-Source

spectrum.ieee.org

1–10 of 130 posts

Re: Llama and ChatGPT Are Not Open-Source

#5
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 #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

#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 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

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.
Post reply on HN