4 ms·

The StackOverflow database was open source for a while, but I haven't checked for a data dump since the new management came in.

by daemin 2y ago

TuringNYC 2y ago
True, may not be open source, but it is still viewable. Best for Society: Open Source <-- Where SO was Medium for Society: Proprietary, but openly browsable <-- Where SO is Worst for Society: Proprietary, not browsable <-- LLM-based code assist tools
- Wowfunhappy 2y ago
  ...where would you classify Llama in here? That's not really "open source" despite what Facebook calls it, but I wouldn't call it proprietary, anyone can download and use the whole thing locally.
  - pabs3 2y ago
    "public weights"?
    - _heimdall 2y ago
      Can those weights be interpreted by anyone viewing them? If not, it seems like publicly available, obfuscated code at best.
      - fragmede 2y ago
        "model available" would be my preferred term. Is Photoshop.exe "interpretable" by anybody with a copy (of windows)? How about a binary that's been heavily decompiled, like a Mario game?
        _heimdall 2y ago
        Photoshop doesn't claim to be open source like llama does though, I'm not sure of the connection you're making. Don't get me wrong, llama is at least more open than OpenAI and that may be meaningful.
        fragmede 2y ago
        The license aside, the question is what can be done with a carefully arranged blob of binary? Without additional software (Windows) I can't really do anything with Photoshop.exe. Similarly, Llama.gguf is either useful, with Ollama.app, or not, standing alone. So (looking past the difference in license), would you consider Photoshop.exe similar in that it's a binary blob that's useless by itself, or is it a useful collection of bytes, and why is/is not an ML model available on hugging faces the same?
        _heimdall 2y ago
        The license used isn't important in my opinion, when talking about open source the question is whether the source code is available to be modified and reviewed/interpreted. Photoshop, or any compiled binary, isn't meant to be open source and the code isn't meant to be reviewable. Llama is called open source, though the most important part isn't publicly available for review. If llama didn't claim to be open source I don't think it would matter that the model itself and all the weights aren't available. If your argument is just that most software is shipped as compiled and/or obfuscated code, sure that's how it is usually done. That isn't considered open source though, and the line with LLMs seems to be very gray - it can be "open source" if the source code for the training logic is available even though the actual code/model being run can't be reviewed or interpreted.
        pabs3 2y ago
        The source data for the training needs to be public and freely licensed too, otherwise its IMO not an open source model.
- justsid 2y ago
  This is just like the majority of communities moving to Discord over Forums. The barrier to entry might be a lot lower than getting a VPS and hosting phpBB or whatever, but the discoverability and searchabilty has gone towards 0. Everything is just moving into opaque black boxes.
  - 8n4vidtmkvmk 2y ago
    I never understood the move to Discord. Maybe I should host a PhpBB and bring some sanity back.
    - weebull 2y ago
      > phpBB Whoa there Nelly! If we're going to resurrect things, can we do it whilst leaving PHP in the past?
      - ribadeo 2y ago
        [dead]
      - 8n4vidtmkvmk 2y ago
        PHP hasn't failed me yet. Been using if for about 20 years. Not heavily but it gets the job done and it's still improving. It's really quite sane if you start comparing it to the alternatives. It continues to 'just work'
  - disqard 2y ago
    Your comment sparked a thought -- maybe this is the "Dark Forest" of the Web: Either your site's content stays hidden behind discord, or an LLM's bot/minion scrapes all your content and makes visiting your site superfluous, thereby effectively killing your site.
    - networked 2y ago
      This is an interesting thought because there is probably a real dynamic like this with some kinds of content, but as an HN comment it is also somewhat self-refuting.

The StackOverflow database was open source for a while, but I haven't checked for a data dump since the new management came in.

by daemin 2y ago

The StackOverflow database was open source for a while, but I haven't checked for a data dump since the new management came in.

TuringNYC 2y ago

True, may not be open source, but it is still viewable. Best for Society: Open Source <-- Where SO was Medium for Society: Proprietary, but openly browsable <-- Where SO is Worst for Society: Proprietary, not browsable <-- LLM-based code assist tools

Wowfunhappy 2y ago
...where would you classify Llama in here? That's not really "open source" despite what Facebook calls it, but I wouldn't call it proprietary, anyone can download and use the whole thing locally.
- pabs3 2y ago
  "public weights"?
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    Can those weights be interpreted by anyone viewing them? If not, it seems like publicly available, obfuscated code at best.
    - fragmede 2y ago
      "model available" would be my preferred term. Is Photoshop.exe "interpretable" by anybody with a copy (of windows)? How about a binary that's been heavily decompiled, like a Mario game?
      - _heimdall 2y ago
        Photoshop doesn't claim to be open source like llama does though, I'm not sure of the connection you're making. Don't get me wrong, llama is at least more open than OpenAI and that may be meaningful.
        fragmede 2y ago
        The license aside, the question is what can be done with a carefully arranged blob of binary? Without additional software (Windows) I can't really do anything with Photoshop.exe. Similarly, Llama.gguf is either useful, with Ollama.app, or not, standing alone. So (looking past the difference in license), would you consider Photoshop.exe similar in that it's a binary blob that's useless by itself, or is it a useful collection of bytes, and why is/is not an ML model available on hugging faces the same?
        _heimdall 2y ago
        The license used isn't important in my opinion, when talking about open source the question is whether the source code is available to be modified and reviewed/interpreted. Photoshop, or any compiled binary, isn't meant to be open source and the code isn't meant to be reviewable. Llama is called open source, though the most important part isn't publicly available for review. If llama didn't claim to be open source I don't think it would matter that the model itself and all the weights aren't available. If your argument is just that most software is shipped as compiled and/or obfuscated code, sure that's how it is usually done. That isn't considered open source though, and the line with LLMs seems to be very gray - it can be "open source" if the source code for the training logic is available even though the actual code/model being run can't be reviewed or interpreted.
        pabs3 2y ago
        The source data for the training needs to be public and freely licensed too, otherwise its IMO not an open source model.
justsid 2y ago
This is just like the majority of communities moving to Discord over Forums. The barrier to entry might be a lot lower than getting a VPS and hosting phpBB or whatever, but the discoverability and searchabilty has gone towards 0. Everything is just moving into opaque black boxes.
- 8n4vidtmkvmk 2y ago
  I never understood the move to Discord. Maybe I should host a PhpBB and bring some sanity back.
  - weebull 2y ago
    > phpBB Whoa there Nelly! If we're going to resurrect things, can we do it whilst leaving PHP in the past?
    - ribadeo 2y ago
      [dead]
    - 8n4vidtmkvmk 2y ago
      PHP hasn't failed me yet. Been using if for about 20 years. Not heavily but it gets the job done and it's still improving. It's really quite sane if you start comparing it to the alternatives. It continues to 'just work'
- disqard 2y ago
  Your comment sparked a thought -- maybe this is the "Dark Forest" of the Web: Either your site's content stays hidden behind discord, or an LLM's bot/minion scrapes all your content and makes visiting your site superfluous, thereby effectively killing your site.
  - networked 2y ago
    This is an interesting thought because there is probably a real dynamic like this with some kinds of content, but as an HN comment it is also somewhat self-refuting.