3 ms·
It's hard to say Llama is an "open source" when their license states Meta has full control under certain circumstances https://raw.githubusercontent.com/meta-l
by jameson 2y ago
It's hard to say Llama is an "open source" when their license states Meta has full control under certain circumstances
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/meta-llama/llama-models/main/models/llama3_1/LICENSE https://raw.githubusercontent.com/meta-llama/llama-models/ma...
> 2. Additional Commercial Terms. If, on the Llama 3.1 version release date, the monthly active users of the products or services made available by or for Licensee, or Licensee’s affiliates, is greater than 700 million monthly active users in the preceding calendar month, you must request a license from Meta, which Meta may grant to you in its sole discretion, and you are not authorized to exercise any of the rights under this Agreement unless or until Meta otherwise expressly grants you such rights.
- __loam 2y agoIt should be transparently clear that this move was taken by Meta to drive their competitors out of business in a capital intensive space.
- apwell23 2y agonot sure how it drives competitors out of business. OpenAI is losing money on queries not on model creation. This opensource model has no impact of their business model of charging users money to run queries. on a side note OpenAI is losing users on its own. It doesn't need meta to put it out of business.
- __loam 2y agoA free alternative to their product has no impact to their business model?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- systemvoltage 2y agoTbh, it’s incredibly generous.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]