Hacker News Reader

Imagine someone giving you a executable binary without the source code and calling it "open source"

I'm actually mostly in your camp here. But it's complicated with AI.

What if someone gave you a binary and the source code, but not a compiler? Maybe not even a language spec?

Or what if they gave you a binary and the source code and a fully documented language spec, and both of 'em all the way down to the compiler? BUT it only runs on special proprietary silicon? Or maybe even the silicon is fully documented, but producing that silicon is effectively out of reach to all but F100 companies?

It's turtles all the way down...

There is the binary (the model) and the source (the thing that allows you to recreate the model, the dataset and methodology). Compilers and how art is made quite simply doesn't factor in here, because nobody is talking about the compiler layer. Art isn't even close to what is present. Trying to make this more complicated than it is is playing into companies' hands by troubling the waters around what constitutes open source.

To be fair, OpenSource troubled the waters around what constitutes free software.

Free(dom Respecting) Software wasn’t just about the source code.

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point....

You can pass in any command line arguments you like, so it must be open source

Reply on news.ycombinator.com