we're calling it openweights now. what is a logical push to have a completely new paradigm be compared with traditional software binaries?

▲ a2ff6eeb0 an hour ago | parent [-]

Check the phrase I quoted. Anyways, I guess OSX is open assembly?

▲ subygan 13 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

is it not open assembly?

open weight models are better than open-assembly binaries (as you put it) because models are grown like plants, you can shape the open-weight model in a direction you want by feeding it more data and compute (aka finetuning).

which is something that is impossible in a binary.

embrace the new paradigm and it's tradeoffs. without scoffing at semantics and criticising from an armchair.

	▲	a2ff6eeb0 3 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I'd encourage you to start referring to it that way,then.

▲ mrkeen 23 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Checked.

  The more open source software out there the better. And the more open weights or even over source AI stuff the better too right?