4 ms·

Having access to a weight doesn't make it open. Else you can make the argument that Microsoft Word is open source because you have access to the binary.

• HPsquared 2y ago
  Indeed, weights are literally binary data. Not human-readable!
  • boroboro4 2y ago
    The access to modify (uptrain/finetune) these weights is the same between Meta & others, unlike with Word (where Microsoft has an advantage because they have code and can recompile it). I think this is the only thing which matters in practical terms.
    • HPsquared 2y ago
      Lots of binary executables and libraries can be customised too. That doesn't make them open-source.
      • boroboro4 2y ago
        This neither makes modification easy, or that’s how owner of the code does modification themselves, and that’s where the difference is.
• spunker540 2y ago
  Word is a good analogy here. The model is a static data file like a word doc. Meta open sourced the code to run inference on the model (ie the code for Microsoft word reading a doc file). They also open sourced the code to train/fine tune the model. (Ie the code for Microsoft word writing a doc file) Then they released a special doc (the llama 3 model), but didn’t include the script they used to create that doc.