Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)PR
Prunebutt @ Prunebutt @slrpnk.net
Posts
10
Comments
1,314
Joined
2 yr. ago

About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

Jump

  • Great, so we agree. ᕕ(ᐛ)ᕗ

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

  • Creative commons and MIT licence are distinct, though.

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

  • It's constantly referred to as "open source".

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

  • You don°t have access to the source.

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

  • So the models aren't opn source 🙄

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

  • Tutorials won't disclose the data used to train the model.

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

  • everything is open source, with the exception of the data

    If I distribute a set consisting of emulator and a Rom of a closed source game (without the sourcecode), then the full set is not open source.

    So if deep seek removed its data set, would you then consider deepseek open source?

    Kind of, but that's like expecting a console without any firmware. The Weights are the important bit of an LLM distribution.

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

  • So an emulator can’t be open source if the methodology on how the developers discovered how to read Nintendo ROM’s was discovered?

    No. The emulator is open source if it supplies the way on hou to get the binary in the end. I don't know how else to explain it to you: No LLM is open source.

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

  • it’s the entirety of the bulk unfiltered data you want

    Or more realistically: a description of how you could source the data.

    doesnt touch on at all how this LLM is different from other LLM’s?

    Correct. Llama isn't open source, either.

    like saying that an open source game emulator can’t be open source because Nintendo games are encapsulated

    Not at all. It's like claiming an emulator is open source, because it has a plugin system, but you need a closed source build dependency that the developer doesn't disclose to the puplic.

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

  • It's still not open source. No matter how extendable the weights are.

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

  • So, Ocarina of Time is considered open source now, since it's been decompiled by the community, or what?

    Community effort and the ability to build on top of stuff doesn't make anything open source.

    Also: initial training data is important.

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

  • The point of open source is access to reproducability the weights are the end products (like a binary blob), you need to supply a way on how the end product is created to be open source.

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

  • They published the source code needed run the model.

    Yeah, but not to train it

    anyone can download the model, run it locally, and further build on it.

    Yeah, it's about as open source as binary blobs.

    Training from scratch costs millions.

    So what? You still can gleam something if you know the dataset on which the model has been trained.

    If software is hard to compile, can you keep the source code closed and still call software "open source"?

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

  • If we're specifically saying that open source means you can recreate the binaries, then data is fundamentally not able to be open source

    lol, are you claiming data isn't reproducable? XD

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

  • You could train it yourself too.

    How, without information on the dataset and the training code?

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

  • Seems kinda reductive about what makes it different from most other LLM’s

    The other LLMs aren't open source, either.

    isn’t that just trained from the other AI?

    Most certainly not. If it were, it wouldn't output coherent text, since LLM output degenerates if you human-centipede its' outputs.

    And the way it uses that data, afaik, is open and editable, and the license to use it is open.

    From that standpoint, every binary blob should be considered "open source", since the machine instructions are readable in RAM.

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

  • Let's transfer your bullshirt take to the kernel, shall we?

    The kernel is instructions, not code. It’s perfectly fine to call it open source even though you don’t have the code to reproduce the kernel from scratch. You are allowed to modify and distribute said modifications so it’s functionally free (as in freedom) anyway.

    🤡

    Edit: It's more that so-called "AI" stakeholders want to launder it's reputation with the "open source" label.

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

  • So, where's the source, then?

    • About as open source as a binary blob without the training data

    Jump

  • Open source means you can recreate the binaries yourself. Neiter Facebook. Nor the devs of deepseek published which training data they used, nor their training algorithm.