3 ms·

the view of the comments here seems to be quite negative for what meta is doing. Honest question, should they go to the route of openai and closed source + paid

by hyuuu 2y ago

the view of the comments here seems to be quite negative for what meta is doing. Honest question, should they go to the route of openai and closed source + paid access instead? OpenAI or Claude seem to garner more positive views than llama open sourced.

naming_the_user 2y ago
The models are not open source, you're getting the equivalent of a precompiled binary. They are free to use.
- RealStickman_ 2y ago
  Free to use with restrictions, so you maybe get 1.5/4 FOSS freedoms.
- Palmik 2y ago
  That's a bad analogy. The weights are much closer to source code, because you can directly modify them (fine tune, merge or otherwise) using open source software that Meta released (torchtune, but there are tons of other libraries and frameworks).
  - progval 2y ago
    You can also modify a precompiled binary with the right tools.
    - Palmik 2y ago
      Except doing continued pre-training or fine tuning of the released model weights is the same process through which the original weights were created in the first place. There's no reverse engineering required. Meta engineers working on various products that need custom versions of the Llama model will use the same processes / tools.
meiraleal 2y ago
Not much would change if they did. Meta intentions and OpenAI intentions are the same: reach monopoly and take all the investment back with a 100x return. Anyone that achieves it will be as evil as the other one. > OpenAI or Claude seem to garner more positive views than llama open sourced. that's more about Meta than the others. Although OpenAI isn't that far from Meta already.
troupo 2y ago
They use "open source" to whitewash their image. Now ask yourself a question: where does Meta's data come from? Perhaps from their users' data? And they opted everyone in by default. And made the opt-out process as cumbersome as possible: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1794863603964891567.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1794863603964891567.html And now complain that the EU is preventing them from "collecting rich cultural context" or something https://x.com/nickclegg/status/1834594456689066225 https://x.com/nickclegg/status/1834594456689066225
- KaiserPro 2y ago
  > Perhaps from their users' data? nope, not yet. FAIR, the people that do the bigboi training, for a lot of their stuff cant even see user data, because the place they do the training can't support the access. Its not like openAI where the lawyers don't even know whats going on, because they've not yet been properly taken to court. at Meta, the lawyers are everywhere and if you do naughty shit to user data, you are going to be absolutely fucked.
  - troupo 2y ago
    > the lawyers are everywhere and if you do naughty shit to user data, you are going to be absolutely fucked. I even provided the links that has screenshots of their opt-out form. --- start quote --- Al at Meta is our collection of generative Al features and experiences, like Meta Al and Al Creative Tools, along with the models that power them. Information you've shared on our Products and services could be things like: - Posts - Photos and their captions - The messages you send to an Al ... We may still process information about you to develop and improve Al at Meta, even if you object or don't use our Products and services. For example, this could happen if you or your information: - Appear anywhere in an image shared on our Products or services by someone who uses them - Are mentioned in posts or captions that someone else shares on our Products and services --- end quote --- See the words "Meta AI" and "models powering it"? Meta couldn't give crap about simpler clear-cut cases like "don't track users across the internet", much less this.
    - 2y ago
VeejayRampay 2y ago
people are just way too invested in the OpenAI hype and they don't want people threatening that in any way
- fullshark 2y ago
  Nah they are just calling out shameless corporate bullshit. OpenAI were bullshitters too re: promoting open source, but they are not even pretending anymore and once they change their governance structure the idea that they were ever promoting open source will be merely an amusing memory.

by hyuuu 2y ago

naming_the_user 2y ago

The models are not open source, you're getting the equivalent of a precompiled binary. They are free to use.

RealStickman_ 2y ago
Free to use with restrictions, so you maybe get 1.5/4 FOSS freedoms.
Palmik 2y ago
That's a bad analogy. The weights are much closer to source code, because you can directly modify them (fine tune, merge or otherwise) using open source software that Meta released (torchtune, but there are tons of other libraries and frameworks).
- progval 2y ago
  You can also modify a precompiled binary with the right tools.
  - Palmik 2y ago
    Except doing continued pre-training or fine tuning of the released model weights is the same process through which the original weights were created in the first place. There's no reverse engineering required. Meta engineers working on various products that need custom versions of the Llama model will use the same processes / tools.

meiraleal 2y ago

Not much would change if they did. Meta intentions and OpenAI intentions are the same: reach monopoly and take all the investment back with a 100x return. Anyone that achieves it will be as evil as the other one. > OpenAI or Claude seem to garner more positive views than llama open sourced. that's more about Meta than the others. Although OpenAI isn't that far from Meta already.

troupo 2y ago

They use "open source" to whitewash their image. Now ask yourself a question: where does Meta's data come from? Perhaps from their users' data? And they opted everyone in by default. And made the opt-out process as cumbersome as possible: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1794863603964891567.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1794863603964891567.html And now complain that the EU is preventing them from "collecting rich cultural context" or something https://x.com/nickclegg/status/1834594456689066225 https://x.com/nickclegg/status/1834594456689066225

KaiserPro 2y ago
> Perhaps from their users' data? nope, not yet. FAIR, the people that do the bigboi training, for a lot of their stuff cant even see user data, because the place they do the training can't support the access. Its not like openAI where the lawyers don't even know whats going on, because they've not yet been properly taken to court. at Meta, the lawyers are everywhere and if you do naughty shit to user data, you are going to be absolutely fucked.
- troupo 2y ago
  > the lawyers are everywhere and if you do naughty shit to user data, you are going to be absolutely fucked. I even provided the links that has screenshots of their opt-out form. --- start quote --- Al at Meta is our collection of generative Al features and experiences, like Meta Al and Al Creative Tools, along with the models that power them. Information you've shared on our Products and services could be things like: - Posts - Photos and their captions - The messages you send to an Al ... We may still process information about you to develop and improve Al at Meta, even if you object or don't use our Products and services. For example, this could happen if you or your information: - Appear anywhere in an image shared on our Products or services by someone who uses them - Are mentioned in posts or captions that someone else shares on our Products and services --- end quote --- See the words "Meta AI" and "models powering it"? Meta couldn't give crap about simpler clear-cut cases like "don't track users across the internet", much less this.
  - 2y ago

VeejayRampay 2y ago

people are just way too invested in the OpenAI hype and they don't want people threatening that in any way

fullshark 2y ago
Nah they are just calling out shameless corporate bullshit. OpenAI were bullshitters too re: promoting open source, but they are not even pretending anymore and once they change their governance structure the idea that they were ever promoting open source will be merely an amusing memory.