3 ms·
> open weights What exactly is this supposed to mean? That I can grab the weights by just downloading them, or something like that? Because when I open up the
by diggan 2y ago
> open weights
What exactly is this supposed to mean? That I can grab the weights by just downloading them, or something like that?
Because when I open up the HuggingFace repository, it asks me to "accept the conditions" (Google’s usage license). How is this different from any other proprietary binaries people distribute on the internet but let you run locally? Are other software (like 1Password for example) also "open software" because you can download it?
- idonotknowwhy 2y agoReplace "google" with "unsloth" in the browser address bar if you want to download them without signing up to hf
- diggan 2y agoRegardless of where you get the weights, Google says you need to follow their terms and conditions for the model/weights: > By using, reproducing, modifying, distributing, performing or displaying any portion or element of Gemma, Model Derivatives including via any Hosted Service, (each as defined below) (collectively, the "Gemma Services") or otherwise accepting the terms of this Agreement, you agree to be bound by this Agreement. https://ai.google.dev/gemma/terms https://ai.google.dev/gemma/terms Worth knowing if you're planning to use this model for production usage/with a business. So once again, I don't understand what "open" is supposed to mean when they call models like these "open weights". What part exactly is "open"?
- whimsicalism 2y agoi think generally these companies are too afraid of the obvious rejoinder to try actually enforcing these terms
- diggan 2y agoProbably, up until they aren't. Are you willing to bet against Google's lawyers feeling daring in the future? As a private individual, I sure aren't, and I don't think I'd bet my (hypothetical) business on it either.
- staticman2 2y agoI don't disagree but even Linux has "Terms and conditions" of usage under it's license you really need to dig into what those are. There's no doubt Gemma's license is less permissive than other models and that it has less community finetuners for that reason.
- keheliya 2y agoAccording to the OSI's open source definition, you can't put restrictions against persons or groups or fields of use. In the license, Linux is not restricted in what domain it will be used (good or bad). Here's OSI's argument about this when Meta's llama put such limitations in their license: https://opensource.org/blog/metas-llama-2-license-is-not-open-source https://opensource.org/blog/metas-llama-2-license-is-not-ope...
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- homarp 2y agocan you link to Linux terms and conditions? search returned nothing.
- balnaphone 2y agohttps://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/license-rules.html https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/license-rules... https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.en.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.en.html
- staticman2 2y agoI guess my comment was a bit wrong, Linux has "TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION" not usage.
- svachalek 2y ago"Open weights" refers to a license that allows you to freely (or mostly freely) copy the model file (i.e. weights). An "open source" model would be possible to build from training data, but those hardly exist.