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

Even worse is calling a proprietary, absolutely closed source, closed data and closed weight company "OpeanAI"

I like how when America does it we call it AI, and when China does it it's just an LLM!

The training data would be incredible big. And it would contain copyright protected material (which is completely okay in my opinion, but might invoce criticism). Hell, it might even be illegal to publish the training data with the copyright protected material.

They published the weights AND their training methods which is about as open as it gets.

Judging by OP’s salt in the comments, I’m guessing they might be an Nvidia investor. My condolences.

Yeah, this shit drives me crazy. Putting aside the fact that it all runs off stolen data from regular people who are being exploited, most of this "AI" shit is basically just freeware if anything, it's about as "open source" as Winamp was back in the day.

There are lots of problems with the new lingo. We need to come up with new words.

How about “Open Weightings”?

Arguably they are a new type of software, which is why the old categories do not align perfectly. Instead of arguing over how to best gatekeep the old name, we need a new classification system.

Seems kinda reductive about what makes it different from most other LLM’s. Reading the comments i see the issue is that the training data is why some consider it not open source, but isn’t that just trained from the other AI? It’s not why this AI is special. And the way it uses that data, afaik, is open and editable, and the license to use it is open. Whats the issue here?

Open weights

i mean, if it's not directly factually inaccurate, than, it is open source. It's just that the specific block of data they used and operate on isn't published or released, which is pretty common even among open source projects.

AI just happens to be in a fairly unique spot where that thing is actually like, pretty important. Though nothing stops other groups from creating an openly accessible one through something like distributed computing. Which seems to be a fancy new kid on the block moment for AI right now.

Open sources will eventually surpass all closed-source softwares in some day, no matter how many billions of dollars are invested in them.

Source - it’s about open source, not access to the database

what a weird hill to die on

Creative Commons would make more sense

It's not just the weights though is it? You can download the training data they used, and run your own instance of the model completely separate from their servers.

Uuuuh… why?

Do you only accept open source code if you can see every key press every developer made?

Would you accept a Smalltalk image as Open Source?

Meta's "open source AI" ad campaign is so frustrating.

k

If the Source is Open to copying, and I won't get sued for doing it, well, then....