> Meta has already called it's software open source. And it may be fair enough. Llama 2 is not open source for two reasons. First and most importantly, the lic

> Meta has already called it's software open source. And it may be fair enough. Llama 2 is not open source for two reasons. First and most importantly, the license restricts certain types of commercial use, while open source software preserves the user's freedom to use the software for any purpose. Second: > "Meta using the term ‘open source’ for this is positively misleading: There is no source to be seen, the training data is entirely undocumented, and beyond the glossy charts the technical documentation is really rather poor. We do not know why Meta is so intent on getting everyone into this model, but the history of this company’s choices does not inspire confidence. Users beware." https://spectrum.ieee.org/open-source-llm-not-open https://spectrum.ieee.org/open-source-llm-not-open