3 ms·
I think the author is missing a really key piece here: they’re not picking these lists of things to prevent from a licensing perspective for moral or ethical re
by orbz 3y ago
I think the author is missing a really key piece here: they’re not picking these lists of things to prevent from a licensing perspective for moral or ethical reasons; they’re limiting their liability.
Companies are sociopathic by nature. They will do everything they can to not limit how much money they can make and do everything they can do to limit how much it will cost them.
- andy99 3y agoI wrote it, I agree that's probably a big reason. It's liable to be a reason why ISPs block certain traffic too like in the EFF article. I don't have enough information to know for sure which is why I said we don't know their motivations. The point still stands though, it's bad for everyone if big model providers start making their own pet lists of prohibited uses. The rest of open source manages fine without doing this.
- orbz 3y agoI appreciate the thinking behind the piece then! The fact they mentioned ITAR leads me to believe this was spearheaded by corporate counsel to limit liability. Also the main difference between this and other open source is they’re still hosting the language models so have a much larger liability in usage.