This is the new OSI Open source definition for AI models:

https://opensource.org/ai/open-source-ai-definition

Mistral Large 4 is definitely not open given the "use for any purpose without having to ask for permission" requirement.

▲

madeofpalk a day ago | parent | next [-]

Well, to be fair, Mistral never say its open source. They call it just open weight.

▲

singpolyma3 a day ago | parent [-]

Sure but people used "open weight" for weights that were open, because "open source" doesn't make much sense for something that has no source.

Now we have these "open inspired but not open" licensed weights and they want to keep the term.

I'll stick with DS4.1 flash. Open and capable

▲

cowboy_henk a day ago | parent [-]

Open source doesn't mean "anyone can use the source code commercially". Open weights similarly doesn't mean the weights can be used for anything. It just means the weights are open for anyone to download and inspect.

	▲	thayne 21 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> Open source doesn't mean "anyone can use the source code commercially". Yes it does. It might have requirements that you release the code for any changes you make to it or link with it. But no OSI (or FSF) approved license prohibits you from using it commercially.

▲

maxloh a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Not really. That definition also requires the training code and training data composition to be open-sourced.

No major Chinese or Western labs satisfy these requirements. The only vendors I can think of that do are Nvidia and Allen AI.

▲

mmargenot a day ago | parent | next [-]

I'm a little confused by your distinction between vendor and lab. AI2 (Allen Institute for AI) is a western lab and they did release a fully open source model, with open weights, data, and training code (Olmo3).

Their technical report on the release is excellent: https://allenai.org/blog/olmo3

They're a public research institute as opposed to one of the proprietary frontier labs, but they've been very open about the science.

	▲	maxloh a day ago \| parent [-]
		Yeah, I mentioned them in my comment. They're my favorite lab/vendor. Everything is open and reproducible. It's just that their models were never frontier-level. By major, I meant frontier or popular.

▲

biggestriverman a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

K2 horizon is the closest to actually releasing everything that I am aware of https://ifm.ai/blog/k2/

	▲	InsideOutSanta a day ago \| parent [-]
		Also Apertus: https://apertus-ai.org/

▲

theplumber a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Nobody can do that because they were all trained on stolen content

▲

manyatoms a day ago | parent [-]

I think IBM's Granite LLM are claimed to be trained only on legally-obtained data

▲

theplumber a day ago | parent | next [-]

Maybe that’s why nobody “heard” about it. It’s funny that we have companies bragging about not using stolen content to train their AI.

	▲	vulture916 a day ago \| parent [-]
		Granite is super good small parameter lineup for local tasks.

▲

salad-tycoon a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Also granite is the model my m2 MacBook will be using to run this survival LLM I found on HN: https://www.brangus.io/survival-llm

▲

a day ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]

▲

fweimer a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Allen AI imposes further restrictions on their model releases, I think: https://allenai.org/responsible-use