5 ms·

I really like how nvidia started doing more normal open source and not locking stuff behind a login to their website. It makes it so much easier now that you ca

I really like how nvidia started doing more normal open source and not locking stuff behind a login to their website. It makes it so much easier now that you can just pip install all the cuda stuff for torch and other libraries without authenticating and downloading from websites and other nonsense. I guess they realized that it was dramatically reducing the engagement with their work. If it’s open source anyway then you should make it as accessible as possible.

jjmarr 2y ago
It being on GitHub doesn't mean it's open-source. https://github.com/NVIDIA/warp?tab=License-1-ov-file#readme https://github.com/NVIDIA/warp?tab=License-1-ov-file#readme Looks more "source available" to me.
- nitinreddy88 2y ago
  That's what open-source means. Source code is open for reading. It has nothing to do with Licensing. You can have any type of license on top of that based on your business needs
  - dagenix 2y ago
    That may be your definition, but that's not everyone's definition. Wikipedia, for example, says: > Open-source software (OSS) is computer software that is released under a license in which the copyright holder grants users the rights to use, study, change, and distribute the software and its source code to anyone and for any purpose. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - j-r-d 2y ago
    No. That's not how it works. It's great that they're making source available but if I can't modify and distribute it, it's not open.
  - TimeBearingDown 2y ago
    No. The Open Source Initiative maintains the definition, which is accepted internationally by multiple government agencies. https://opensource.org/osd https://opensource.org/osd https://opensource.org/authority https://opensource.org/authority
foresterre 2y ago
I would argue that this isn't "normal open source", though it is indeed not locked behind a login on their website. The license (1) is feels very much proprietary, even if the source code is available. (1) https://github.com/NVIDIA/warp/blob/main/LICENSE.md https://github.com/NVIDIA/warp/blob/main/LICENSE.md
- bionhoward 2y ago
  Agreed, especially given this "2.7 You may not use the Software for the purpose of developing competing products or technologies or assist a third party in such activities." vs "California’s public policy provides that every contract that restrains anyone from engaging in a lawful profession, trade, or business of any kind is, to that extent, void, except under limited statutory exceptions." https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB699 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml... (Owner/Partner who sold business, may voluntarily agree to a noncompete, (which is now federally https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/rules/noncompete-rule https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/rules/noncompete-ru... banned) is the only exception I found). I'm not a lawyer. Any lawyers around? Could the 2nd provision invalidate the 1st, or not?
  - philipov 2y ago
    You're free to engage in a lawful profession, just not using that Software for it. "to that extent" is not there merely for show.
    - bionhoward 2y ago
      Hey, that's a real argument, and it makes sense. Thank you for helping to clarify this topic. Question: why would NVIDIA, makers of general intelligence, which seems to compete with everyone, publish code for software nobody can use without breaking NVIDIA rules? Wouldn't it be better for everyone if they just kept that code private?
      - bionhoward 2y ago
dagmx 2y ago
This isn’t open source. It s the equivalent of headers being available to a dylib, just that they happen to be a python API. Most of the magic is behind closed source components, and it’s posted with a fairly restrictive license.
- fragmede 2y ago
  And people say nvida doesn't have a moat.
  - markhahn 2y ago
    donno. it's clear they have no effective moat. they still try hard, making themselves quite customer-hostile.
    - yosefk 2y ago
      CUDA is a moat. What's ineffective about it?
- boywitharupee 2y ago
  In a similar fashion, you'll see that JAX has frontend code being open-sourced, while device-related code is distributed as binaries. For example, if you're on Google's TPU, you'll see libtpu.so, and on macOS, you'll see pjrt_plugin_metal_1.x.dylib. The main optimizations (scheduler, vectorizer, etc.) are hidden behind these shared libraries. If open-sourced, they might reveal hints about proprietary algorithms and provide clues to various hardware components, which could potentially be exploited.
water-your-self 2y ago
Accessible, as long as you purchase their very contested hardware.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
markhahn 2y ago
it's not open source and can only be used with nvidia gpus (by license).
rldjbpin 2y ago
there has been a rise of "open"-access and freeware software/services in this space. see hugging face and certain models tied to accounts that accept some eula before downloading model weights, or weird wrapper code by ai library creators which makes it harder to run offline (ultralytics library comes to mind for instance). i like the value they bring, but the trend is against the existing paradigm of how python ecosystem used to be.

jjmarr 2y ago

It being on GitHub doesn't mean it's open-source. https://github.com/NVIDIA/warp?tab=License-1-ov-file#readme https://github.com/NVIDIA/warp?tab=License-1-ov-file#readme Looks more "source available" to me.

nitinreddy88 2y ago
That's what open-source means. Source code is open for reading. It has nothing to do with Licensing. You can have any type of license on top of that based on your business needs
- dagenix 2y ago
  That may be your definition, but that's not everyone's definition. Wikipedia, for example, says: > Open-source software (OSS) is computer software that is released under a license in which the copyright holder grants users the rights to use, study, change, and distribute the software and its source code to anyone and for any purpose. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- j-r-d 2y ago
  No. That's not how it works. It's great that they're making source available but if I can't modify and distribute it, it's not open.
- TimeBearingDown 2y ago
  No. The Open Source Initiative maintains the definition, which is accepted internationally by multiple government agencies. https://opensource.org/osd https://opensource.org/osd https://opensource.org/authority https://opensource.org/authority

foresterre 2y ago

I would argue that this isn't "normal open source", though it is indeed not locked behind a login on their website. The license (1) is feels very much proprietary, even if the source code is available. (1) https://github.com/NVIDIA/warp/blob/main/LICENSE.md https://github.com/NVIDIA/warp/blob/main/LICENSE.md

bionhoward 2y ago
Agreed, especially given this "2.7 You may not use the Software for the purpose of developing competing products or technologies or assist a third party in such activities." vs "California’s public policy provides that every contract that restrains anyone from engaging in a lawful profession, trade, or business of any kind is, to that extent, void, except under limited statutory exceptions." https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB699 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml... (Owner/Partner who sold business, may voluntarily agree to a noncompete, (which is now federally https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/rules/noncompete-rule https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/rules/noncompete-ru... banned) is the only exception I found). I'm not a lawyer. Any lawyers around? Could the 2nd provision invalidate the 1st, or not?
- philipov 2y ago
  You're free to engage in a lawful profession, just not using that Software for it. "to that extent" is not there merely for show.
  - bionhoward 2y ago
    Hey, that's a real argument, and it makes sense. Thank you for helping to clarify this topic. Question: why would NVIDIA, makers of general intelligence, which seems to compete with everyone, publish code for software nobody can use without breaking NVIDIA rules? Wouldn't it be better for everyone if they just kept that code private?
    - bionhoward 2y ago

dagmx 2y ago

This isn’t open source. It s the equivalent of headers being available to a dylib, just that they happen to be a python API. Most of the magic is behind closed source components, and it’s posted with a fairly restrictive license.

fragmede 2y ago
And people say nvida doesn't have a moat.
- markhahn 2y ago
  donno. it's clear they have no effective moat. they still try hard, making themselves quite customer-hostile.
  - yosefk 2y ago
    CUDA is a moat. What's ineffective about it?
boywitharupee 2y ago
In a similar fashion, you'll see that JAX has frontend code being open-sourced, while device-related code is distributed as binaries. For example, if you're on Google's TPU, you'll see libtpu.so, and on macOS, you'll see pjrt_plugin_metal_1.x.dylib. The main optimizations (scheduler, vectorizer, etc.) are hidden behind these shared libraries. If open-sourced, they might reveal hints about proprietary algorithms and provide clues to various hardware components, which could potentially be exploited.

water-your-self 2y ago

Accessible, as long as you purchase their very contested hardware.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

markhahn 2y ago

it's not open source and can only be used with nvidia gpus (by license).

rldjbpin 2y ago

there has been a rise of "open"-access and freeware software/services in this space. see hugging face and certain models tied to accounts that accept some eula before downloading model weights, or weird wrapper code by ai library creators which makes it harder to run offline (ultralytics library comes to mind for instance). i like the value they bring, but the trend is against the existing paradigm of how python ecosystem used to be.