Talking with a friend, he noted that you can't modify the weights directly. You can't go in and change a floating point number and mess with it. You have to recompile those from somewhere else. Does a license on the weights (assuming he's right) make sense if true?
@mjasay
-
Rethinking Open Source Licensing for AI Model Weights
By
–
Also, do you think the current licensing of, say, Llama 2 does that? Meaning, applies the license to the weights? It seems like the license is more broadly applied than that, and that we may need some tweaks to the OSD to reimagine open source for AI.
-
Defining Open Source for Large Language Models Precisely
By
–
Yes, this is what I'm thinking (I'm in the middle of a post on the topic and really wanted your feedback). I think we're a bit too casual in how we apply "open source" to LLMs, & need to get crisp in how we think about it. No one is as far on the path as you are, so I pinged you
-
What Does Open Source Really Mean for LLM Weights?
By
–
But more importantly (for me), I'm grappling with what "open source" means in LLMs/AI. The source code isn't like what we'd find in, say, Datasette. It seems ppl think the license applies to the weights in an LLM, but they're just floating point numbers.
-
AI Model Licensing: Architecture, Weights, and Delta Distribution
By
–
Should the license be on the architecture? But, the same architecture with different weights can give you a completely different AI. Should the license be on the weights + architecture? Sometimes we ship deltas. Does the license apply to that?
-
Redefining Open Source for Large Language Models
By
–
We casually apply the Open Source Definition as if it's dispositive here but, and I may be missing something here, it feels like LLMs are very different and the term "open source", or rather the definition, needs to be carefully recast for AI.
-
Meta Llama 2 licensing: poison pill or innovation accelerator?
By
–
Hey, @simonw
, serious question(s). You call Meta's open, but not open source licensing of Llama 2 "a serious poison pill" but also that it "drove the pace of open innovation into hyperdrive." This seems like two opposing arguments (or potentially so)? https://
simonwillison.net/2023/Aug/27/wo
rdcamp-llms/#openly-licensed-models
… -
DevRel Strategy: Prioritizing Developer Needs Over Events
By
–
The message from developers was essentially: give me the information I need to get my job done with minimal fuss/friction. But too often DevRel was spending big on in-person events. Events have a place, but they're not The Place™. This reshaped how I thought of my mission.
-
DevRel Leaders’ Budget Priorities vs Developer Needs Mismatch
By
–
I once attended a small conf w/ heads of DevRel from AWS, Microsoft, Google, Twilio, etc: a who's who of DevRel. They'd previously polled 15K+ developers to ask what they needed to be productive, and separately asked the ~50 DevRel leaders where we spent time/$. It was .
-
Developer Relations Must Align With Business Goals
By
–
No, not generating leads, but aligned with that motion? Absolutely. I find too often devrel thinks it's a snowflake and bemoans that no one appreciates them, while not actually aligning to business goals.