3 ms·

A challenge here is that it is pedantic, even if it's true. I've been very vocal about how the LLaMAs as well as other models like those released under RAIL lic

by andy99 3y ago

A challenge here is that it is pedantic, even if it's true. I've been very vocal about how the LLaMAs as well as other models like those released under RAIL licenses are not open source. But the truth is very few people care and attitudes like the one above are common. What needs to happen is for a strong, and I'd suggest copyleft, alternative to emerge that's good enough to make people have to care more about license terms. That plus continued advocacy in the face of people dismissing pedantic distinctions as irrelevant.

nomel 3y ago
> and I'd suggest copyleft, alternative to emerge that's good enough to make people have to care more about license terms I keep seeing this, but I can't understand how it would work. Bored nerds will volunteer their time to open source, with little return. That's why I did it. Generally, nobody will volunteer their money to open source. This is unfortunate, and a huge problem. Training neural nets requires the money. Where does it come from?
- andy99 3y ago
  I'm not saying it's a solved problem though there are already initiatives like AI Horde that are doing volunteer distributed inference (it it looks like now fine-tuning) on GPUs https://stablehorde.net/ https://stablehorde.net/ Plus it can be a strategic choice for institutions and companies, just like Linux is for example.
- gtirloni 3y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-funded_crowdfunding_projects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-funded_crowdfu...
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
serf 3y ago
>A challenge here is that it is pedantic, even if it's true. it's not pedantry unless it's a minor detail, and given that the entire license behind llama has next to nothing to do with the open source model or existing open source licensing, this isn't a minor detail. the court-room doesn't care if 'few people care'. it's obvious to anyone that has been to a CS convention in the past 20 years that the whole open-source thing from large corporations is used to leverage good-will to recruit useful labor and to collect community 'altruism-points' so that they can make shadier decisions later on and hopefully trap a captive audience, not to follow the ethical ideals of open-source but to enhance their bottom-line. 'Trojan-horse open-source'.
- stale2002 3y ago
  > the court-room doesn't care Not sure if you were aware, but nobody is in court right now. >it's not pedantry unless it's a minor detail It is minor though. The license allows almost everyone to use it, excluding literally like Apple and Google, and for a few other unenforceable use cases. Everyone else is in the clear.

by andy99 3y ago

nomel 3y ago

> and I'd suggest copyleft, alternative to emerge that's good enough to make people have to care more about license terms I keep seeing this, but I can't understand how it would work. Bored nerds will volunteer their time to open source, with little return. That's why I did it. Generally, nobody will volunteer their money to open source. This is unfortunate, and a huge problem. Training neural nets requires the money. Where does it come from?

andy99 3y ago
I'm not saying it's a solved problem though there are already initiatives like AI Horde that are doing volunteer distributed inference (it it looks like now fine-tuning) on GPUs https://stablehorde.net/ https://stablehorde.net/ Plus it can be a strategic choice for institutions and companies, just like Linux is for example.
gtirloni 3y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-funded_crowdfunding_projects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-funded_crowdfu...

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

serf 3y ago

>A challenge here is that it is pedantic, even if it's true. it's not pedantry unless it's a minor detail, and given that the entire license behind llama has next to nothing to do with the open source model or existing open source licensing, this isn't a minor detail. the court-room doesn't care if 'few people care'. it's obvious to anyone that has been to a CS convention in the past 20 years that the whole open-source thing from large corporations is used to leverage good-will to recruit useful labor and to collect community 'altruism-points' so that they can make shadier decisions later on and hopefully trap a captive audience, not to follow the ethical ideals of open-source but to enhance their bottom-line. 'Trojan-horse open-source'.

stale2002 3y ago
> the court-room doesn't care Not sure if you were aware, but nobody is in court right now. >it's not pedantry unless it's a minor detail It is minor though. The license allows almost everyone to use it, excluding literally like Apple and Google, and for a few other unenforceable use cases. Everyone else is in the clear.