Hacker News Reader

From the link the the person you're reply to posted:

> The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in source code as well as compiled form.

The compute graph with trained weight is very much a compiled form of the model. The source code would include everything needed to train that model and reproduce it.

EDIT: wasn't fast enough

View on HN

> The source code would include everything needed to train that model and reproduce it.

You know these models are trained on internet scrape which contains copyrighted content, so the dataset can't be open sourced. It's either this or bad models.

In theory, you must have written some code to train the models + download the data ... just openning this code + adding logging to store the sources trained on, you could achieve trully "open source" (anybody can now go and scrape + train the same way you did and achieve the same outcome/model)

I'm not saying "opening models is bad", it's good. However imo it would be nice to have a semantic way to differentiate between those two

And there's a lot of third party closed source code in windows that means it would be difficult for them to open source it.

They don't get to claim that it's open source just because it would be too hard to actually open source.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com