• boonhet@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 hours ago

      They’re releasing it open weighs mostly, not open source necessarily.

      Not all that different from the freeware model, where you get a binary that you can run, but you don’t really have the building blocks to make it yourself.

      • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Yeah, for me, I am very strict about that. If it is not open source, I will not use it.

        I’m aware of the difference between open weight models and open source models, and I will not use open weight models because they are not open source.

        Before I learned that I should care, I used closed source software and so now have some closed source software that I still use because of the fact that I got used to it and can’t really easily get rid of it.

        AI is the very first technology where I can draw the line immediately and say I will never use a closed source system.

        I have switched to open source software and operating systems as much as possible, but because of the fact that I used operating systems and software before I cared about open source, I still have some dead weight to drag around. And with AI, I’m hoping to avoid that issue.

        For example, every application on my phone is open source, except for one, and I find that app useful enough that I cannot get rid of it.

        • vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          58 minutes ago

          source includes the training data. If i gave someone the full source code of a wasm interpreter and a wasm blob that contains all of the logic of the actual application, with no way of building that blob yourself, and call that open source, I’d be laughed out of the room.

          “open source” models usually do exactly this