3 ms·

If they are nor copyrightable, that'll be the end of publicly-released weights by for-profit companies. All subsequent models will be served behind an API.

dragonwriter 3y ago
> If they are nor copyrightable, that'll be the end of publicly-released weights by for-profit companies I don’t see why, for-profit companies release permissively-licensed ooen-source code all the time, and noncopyrightable models aren't practically much different than that.
- bilbo0s 3y ago
  Because the courts will have determined their business models for them. As mercenary as it may sound, what these companies are trying to do is find a business model that is as friendly to themselves as it is hostile to their competitors. This is all part of the jockeying.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    And, sure, lack of copyrightability changes the parameters and will change behavior. What I think you have failed to support is that the particular change that it will induce will eliminate all such releases.
- sangnoir 3y ago
  I debated whether to be more specific and verbose in my earlier comment and brevity won at the expense of clarity. I meant large models that cost 6 or 7 digits to train likely won't be released if the donor company can't control how the models are used. > I don’t see why, for-profit companies release permissively-licensed ooen-source code all the time I agree with this - however, they tend to open-source non-core components - Google won't release search engine code, Amazon wont release scalable-virtualization-in-a-box, etc. I'm confident that Facebook won't release a hypothetical Llama 5 in a manner that enables it to be used to improve ChatGPT 8 - the aim will be unchanged from today, byt the mechanism will shift from licensing to rate-limiting, authentication & IP-bans.

3 ms·

If they are nor copyrightable, that'll be the end of publicly-released weights by for-profit companies. All subsequent models will be served behind an API.

by sangnoir 3y ago

dragonwriter 3y ago
> If they are nor copyrightable, that'll be the end of publicly-released weights by for-profit companies I don’t see why, for-profit companies release permissively-licensed ooen-source code all the time, and noncopyrightable models aren't practically much different than that.
- bilbo0s 3y ago
  Because the courts will have determined their business models for them. As mercenary as it may sound, what these companies are trying to do is find a business model that is as friendly to themselves as it is hostile to their competitors. This is all part of the jockeying.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    And, sure, lack of copyrightability changes the parameters and will change behavior. What I think you have failed to support is that the particular change that it will induce will eliminate all such releases.
- sangnoir 3y ago
  I debated whether to be more specific and verbose in my earlier comment and brevity won at the expense of clarity. I meant large models that cost 6 or 7 digits to train likely won't be released if the donor company can't control how the models are used. > I don’t see why, for-profit companies release permissively-licensed ooen-source code all the time I agree with this - however, they tend to open-source non-core components - Google won't release search engine code, Amazon wont release scalable-virtualization-in-a-box, etc. I'm confident that Facebook won't release a hypothetical Llama 5 in a manner that enables it to be used to improve ChatGPT 8 - the aim will be unchanged from today, byt the mechanism will shift from licensing to rate-limiting, authentication & IP-bans.