5 ms·
> This is a source-available model, not an open model. To me, "source available" implies that everything you need to reproduce the model is also available, and
by CharlesW 3y ago
> This is a source-available model, not an open model.
To me, "source available" implies that everything you need to reproduce the model is also available, and that doesn't appear to be the case. How is the resulting model more "free as in freedom" than a compiled binary?
- occamrazor 3y agoI like: - “open weights” for no training data and no restrictions on use, - “weights available” for no training data and restrictions on use, like in this case.
- Spivak 3y agoI don't think it's possible to have an "open training data" model because it would get DMCA'd immediately and open you up to lawsuits from everyone who found their works in the training set. I hope we can fix the legal landscape to enable publicly sharing training data but I can't really judge the companies keeping it a secret today.
- CharlesW 3y ago> I don't think it's possible to have an "open training data" model because it would get DMCA'd immediately… This isn't a problem because OpenAI says, "training AI models using publicly available internet materials is fair use". /s https://openai.com/blog/openai-and-journalism https://openai.com/blog/openai-and-journalism
- Spivak 3y agoI don't think it's that crazy, even if you're sure it's fair use I wouldn't paint a huge target on my back before there's a definite ruling and I doubly wouldn't test the waters of the legality of re-hosting copyrighted content to be downloaded by randos who won't be training models with it. If they're going to get away with this collecting data and having a legal chain-of-custody so you can actually say it was only used to train models and no one else has access to it goes a long way.