2 ms·
I did not give consent to train on my software and the license does not allow commercial use of it. They have taken my code and now are dictating how I can use
by hehdhdjehehegwv 2y ago
I did not give consent to train on my software and the license does not allow commercial use of it.
They have taken my code and now are dictating how I can use their derived work.
Personally I think these tools are useful, but if the data comes from the commons the model should also belong to the commons. This is just another attempt to gain private benefit from public work.
There are legal issues to be resolved, and there is an explosion of lawsuits already, but the fact pattern is simple and applies to nearly all closed-source AI companies.
- portaouflop 2y agoMistral is as open as they get, most others are far worse. Here you can use the model without issues, as others are saying it’s doubtful they would sue you if you were to use code generated by the model in a commercial app
- mananaysiempre 2y agoReplit’s replit-code[1,2] is CC BY-SA 4.0 for the weights, Apache 2.0 for the sources. Replit has its own unpleasant history[3], but the model’s terms are good. (The model itself is not as good, but deciding whether that’s a worthwhile tradeoff is up to you. The tradeoff exists and is meaningful, is my point.) [1] https://huggingface.co/replit/replit-code-v1-3b https://huggingface.co/replit/replit-code-v1-3b [2] https://huggingface.co/replit/replit-code-v1_5-3b https://huggingface.co/replit/replit-code-v1_5-3b [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27424195 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27424195
- hehdhdjehehegwv 2y agoThis model is more restricted than Mistral and Mixtral - this is a new development from them.