4 ms·

Dumb question: what should open-source mean in the context of something like this? Open access to the training data and training pipeline as well?

by paulgb 3y ago

CharlesW 3y ago
It's not a dumb question, and the answer is "yes".
- dudus 3y ago
  If you release that instead of the binary weights you can be both more open and less useful for users. Fun
- zeroCalories 3y ago
  Come on, that's not reasonable to expect from a company, or useful for indie hackers. Having weights that can be used however you like is enough for most people, even large companies.
  - schoen 3y ago
    Maybe it should be called something else? "Openly-licensed"? Just because the model weights are not really "source" (either as a matter of intuition or for example following the OSI "preferred form in which a programmer would modify the program" definition).
    - zeroCalories 3y ago
      Sure, but I don't want to train anyone's model from scratch. Realistically, I can't download all the training data, or run the pipeline, or train the model. Making all of that available to me would be a massive burden on the company too, so they simply won't do it. If I'm able to fine-tune it, that's enough for me, and imo, that fits with the spirit of open/free software. We have to understand that this is fundamentally a different thing than something like the Linux kernel, and closer to something like an industrial project. The output is just a bunch of numbers instead of something physical.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
- simonw 3y ago
  A big catch here is that you can't slap an open source license on a bunch of copyrighted training data, and to date no-one has created a truly convincing LLM exclusively trained on public domain data. It might happen soon though - there are some convincing effort in progress.
  - logicchains 3y ago
    https://substack.recursal.ai/p/eaglex-17t-soaring-past-llama-7b https://substack.recursal.ai/p/eaglex-17t-soaring-past-llama... this one claims to have been trained only on permissively licensed data.
  - CharlesW 3y ago
    Absolutely, because it’s trained mostly on unlicensed, copyrighted content, they basically can’t release source.
    - gfodor 3y ago
      Many people think these companies are training on unlicensed data but I think OpenAI licenses their data, they just “license” it the way one would need to in order to read it.
      - CharlesW 3y ago
        > …I think OpenAI licenses their data… They've just started to (in response to lawsuits, it must be noted) and in the meantime, they're simultaneously claiming that (1) what they're doing is fair use (a.k.a. fair dealing) and (2) preparing for the day when courts confirm that it isn't.
      - zer00eyz 3y ago
        You all keep using the word "Data" Data, as in facts, as in the frequency of one word in relation to another. "Copyright does not protect facts, ideas, systems, or methods of operation, although it may protect the way these things are expressed..." FROM: https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html It's not a question of if, rather when the cat gets out of the bag and the legal battle starts. The problem is that all the copyright applies to the expression not the factual information it expresses (in this case word relations). Now "how math works" and "the language of the law" are going to make for an interesting court case. I suspect that math wins here but it depends on what judge gets it and how high it goes.
- nabakin 3y ago
  Agreed. It's ridiculous people have to resort to saying their question dumb to avoid being attacked by toxic commenters.
TaylorAlexander 3y ago
The Open Source Initiative is actively working on this over the course of this year, and your input will help define that meaning! Please see here for more: https://opensource.org/blog/open-source-ai-definition-weekly-update-mar-11 https://opensource.org/blog/open-source-ai-definition-weekly...
Q6T46nT668w6i3m 3y ago
Yes, training and evaluation code, i.e., the code used to generate the weights.

Dumb question: what should open-source mean in the context of something like this? Open access to the training data and training pipeline as well?

by paulgb 3y ago

Dumb question: what should open-source mean in the context of something like this? Open access to the training data and training pipeline as well?

CharlesW 3y ago

It's not a dumb question, and the answer is "yes".

dudus 3y ago
If you release that instead of the binary weights you can be both more open and less useful for users. Fun
zeroCalories 3y ago
Come on, that's not reasonable to expect from a company, or useful for indie hackers. Having weights that can be used however you like is enough for most people, even large companies.
- schoen 3y ago
  Maybe it should be called something else? "Openly-licensed"? Just because the model weights are not really "source" (either as a matter of intuition or for example following the OSI "preferred form in which a programmer would modify the program" definition).
  - zeroCalories 3y ago
    Sure, but I don't want to train anyone's model from scratch. Realistically, I can't download all the training data, or run the pipeline, or train the model. Making all of that available to me would be a massive burden on the company too, so they simply won't do it. If I'm able to fine-tune it, that's enough for me, and imo, that fits with the spirit of open/free software. We have to understand that this is fundamentally a different thing than something like the Linux kernel, and closer to something like an industrial project. The output is just a bunch of numbers instead of something physical.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
simonw 3y ago
A big catch here is that you can't slap an open source license on a bunch of copyrighted training data, and to date no-one has created a truly convincing LLM exclusively trained on public domain data. It might happen soon though - there are some convincing effort in progress.
- logicchains 3y ago
  https://substack.recursal.ai/p/eaglex-17t-soaring-past-llama-7b https://substack.recursal.ai/p/eaglex-17t-soaring-past-llama... this one claims to have been trained only on permissively licensed data.
- CharlesW 3y ago
  Absolutely, because it’s trained mostly on unlicensed, copyrighted content, they basically can’t release source.
  - gfodor 3y ago
    Many people think these companies are training on unlicensed data but I think OpenAI licenses their data, they just “license” it the way one would need to in order to read it.
    - CharlesW 3y ago
      > …I think OpenAI licenses their data… They've just started to (in response to lawsuits, it must be noted) and in the meantime, they're simultaneously claiming that (1) what they're doing is fair use (a.k.a. fair dealing) and (2) preparing for the day when courts confirm that it isn't.
    - zer00eyz 3y ago
      You all keep using the word "Data" Data, as in facts, as in the frequency of one word in relation to another. "Copyright does not protect facts, ideas, systems, or methods of operation, although it may protect the way these things are expressed..." FROM: https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html It's not a question of if, rather when the cat gets out of the bag and the legal battle starts. The problem is that all the copyright applies to the expression not the factual information it expresses (in this case word relations). Now "how math works" and "the language of the law" are going to make for an interesting court case. I suspect that math wins here but it depends on what judge gets it and how high it goes.
nabakin 3y ago
Agreed. It's ridiculous people have to resort to saying their question dumb to avoid being attacked by toxic commenters.

TaylorAlexander 3y ago

The Open Source Initiative is actively working on this over the course of this year, and your input will help define that meaning! Please see here for more: https://opensource.org/blog/open-source-ai-definition-weekly-update-mar-11 https://opensource.org/blog/open-source-ai-definition-weekly...

Q6T46nT668w6i3m 3y ago

Yes, training and evaluation code, i.e., the code used to generate the weights.