| ▲ | verdverm 4 hours ago | |||||||
model weights are more like a video file which has metadata about the format so any video player can play it we run and change llm models with a variety of tools | ||||||||
| ▲ | nwiswell 4 hours ago | parent [-] | |||||||
Here's my thinking: Cloud: - You cannot directly execute a remotely-hosted program. - You cannot run inference on an API-served model. --- Closed-source: - You can execute a program with the binary. You cannot generate a new binary, but you could try to reverse-engineer it or (painfully) modify its execution. - You can run inference on a model with the weights. You cannot re-produce a new set of weights from scratch, but you can fine-tune. --- Truly open: - You can freely modify the source and produce new binaries. - You can use the original training data and model architecture to independently re-produce the weights (assuming you've got the compute). You can modify the model architecture to get the weights that would've resulted from training the model that way. --- To me these are pretty clear parallels... I don't think the weights provided in a vacuum are in the spirit of open source, historically speaking. The policy argument is totally separate, of course, and I fully understand why none of the frontier labs are truly open. | ||||||||
| ||||||||