• sunstoned@lemmus.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              My point precisely :)

              A pre-trained model alone can’t really be open source. Without the source code and full data set used to generate it, a model alone is analogous to a binary.

              • chebra@mstdn.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                @sunstoned @Ephera That’s nonsense. You could write the scripts, collect the data, publish all, but without the months of GPU training you wouldn’t have the trained model, so it would all be worthless. The code used to train all the proprietary models is already open-source, it’s things like PyTorch, Tensorflow etc. For a model to be open-source means you can download the weights and you are allowed to use it as you please, including modifying it and publishing again. It’s not about the dataset.

                • dandi8@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Just because open source AI is not feasible at the moment is no reason to change the definition of open source.

                  • chebra@mstdn.io
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    @dandi8 but you are the one who is changing it. And who said it’s not feasible? Mixtral model is open-source. WizardLM2 is open-source. Phi3:mini is open-source… what’s your point?

                    But the license of the model is not related to the license of the data used for training, nor the license for the scripts and libraries. Those are three separate things.