Comment on Meta made its Llama 2 AI model open-source because 'Zuck has balls,' a former top Facebook engineer says

• BeefPiano@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  The whole point of open-source is to be able to recreate it yourself so you can make changes. This is freeware. Free-as-in-beer, not free-as-in-speech. Hell, with freeware I can use it for commercial purposes, it’s not even as free as that.

  source

  • just_another_person@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    In the AI world it’s a bit different. You can do whatever you want with the model and weights data which will net you the functional part of the resulting product. Train, retrain, dissect, segment…etc. They’re just not giving out the source for the actual engine. The people working with such things really only care about the data, and in most cases, would probably convert it to a different engine anyway.

    source

    • BeefPiano@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Can I remake the model only including Creative Commons sourced training material?

      source

      • just_another_person@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        You can reuse the data however you want, yes. You just can’t do it with their proprietary model.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Calling ML models “Open Source” is already confused. Because they are not programs, but rather formats, they don’t come 1:1 with the source.

    You can obtain a model and train it futher. Similliar how you can get JPEG file with permissive licence, edit it and share it. Having the GIMP/Photoshop project from the image was created from is helpful but not nessesary.

    source

    • dym_sh@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      here’s core difference: the nature of ai-models is generative, but all layers in a .PSD file are inherently static.

      better analogy would be rendering of a fractal — a limited subset of infinite possibilities, but to explore the rest of them you need both rules and data

      source