4 ms·

I think OP mischaracterized the issue with the license, its more that the weights don’t fall under the same scope. They’re research use only, no commercial use

I think OP mischaracterized the issue with the license, its more that the weights don’t fall under the same scope. They’re research use only, no commercial use allowed.

rasbt 4y ago
Not sure, but I think the point was that if you have something in GPL license (like the code in this case) it's open source, but that doesn't mean you can use that for your business application. That's because GPL requires you open sourcing all derivative work and most businesses don't want to/can't do that.
- lantiga 4y ago
  The AI ecosystem is almost entirely Apache 2/MIT/BSD, and GPL is just incompatible with it. This is a blocker to mixing and matching, a simple Apache 2 rewrite fixes that problem. Weights? It’s another issue but we’ll be looking forward to fixing that too.
  - dTal 4y ago
    How is it incompatible? You can use code under all of those licenses in a GPLd work.
    - bayindirh 4y ago
      You can’t close down GPL code as you see fit. Irrevocable openness is scary for AI community, it seems. Telling…
- layer8 4y ago
  Does AI output constitute derivative work of the AI? Would be interesting…
UncleOxidant 4y ago
Yeah, this is weird, because there are plenty of open source implementations of the lama model on github - alpaca.cpp in c++ is one, there are many others in PyTorch such as the one used by ChatLLaMa. But without the weights they're not very useful (unless you're going to try to train it yourself - good luck with that unless you've got a lot of compute power available). A quick check on github and I find this one also with an Apache license: https://github.com/chris-alexiuk/alpaca-lora https://github.com/chris-alexiuk/alpaca-lora and alpaca.cpp with an MIT license: https://github.com/antimatter15/alpaca.cpp/blob/master/LICENSE https://github.com/antimatter15/alpaca.cpp/blob/master/LICEN...
7to2 4y ago
> They’re research use only, no commercial use allowed. if you agreed to Facebook's contract. If you haven't, it's either public domain or copyright infringement.

I think OP mischaracterized the issue with the license, its more that the weights don’t fall under the same scope. They’re research use only, no commercial use allowed.

rasbt 4y ago

Not sure, but I think the point was that if you have something in GPL license (like the code in this case) it's open source, but that doesn't mean you can use that for your business application. That's because GPL requires you open sourcing all derivative work and most businesses don't want to/can't do that.

lantiga 4y ago
The AI ecosystem is almost entirely Apache 2/MIT/BSD, and GPL is just incompatible with it. This is a blocker to mixing and matching, a simple Apache 2 rewrite fixes that problem. Weights? It’s another issue but we’ll be looking forward to fixing that too.
- dTal 4y ago
  How is it incompatible? You can use code under all of those licenses in a GPLd work.
  - bayindirh 4y ago
    You can’t close down GPL code as you see fit. Irrevocable openness is scary for AI community, it seems. Telling…
layer8 4y ago
Does AI output constitute derivative work of the AI? Would be interesting…

UncleOxidant 4y ago

Yeah, this is weird, because there are plenty of open source implementations of the lama model on github - alpaca.cpp in c++ is one, there are many others in PyTorch such as the one used by ChatLLaMa. But without the weights they're not very useful (unless you're going to try to train it yourself - good luck with that unless you've got a lot of compute power available). A quick check on github and I find this one also with an Apache license: https://github.com/chris-alexiuk/alpaca-lora https://github.com/chris-alexiuk/alpaca-lora and alpaca.cpp with an MIT license: https://github.com/antimatter15/alpaca.cpp/blob/master/LICENSE https://github.com/antimatter15/alpaca.cpp/blob/master/LICEN...

7to2 4y ago

> They’re research use only, no commercial use allowed. if you agreed to Facebook's contract. If you haven't, it's either public domain or copyright infringement.