Best for Society: Open Source <-- Where SO was
Medium for Society: Proprietary, but openly browsable <-- Where SO is
Worst for Society: Proprietary, not browsable <-- LLM-based code assist tools
Either your site's content stays hidden behind discord, or an LLM's bot/minion scrapes all your content and makes visiting your site superfluous, thereby effectively killing your site.
Whoa there Nelly!
If we're going to resurrect things, can we do it whilst leaving PHP in the past?
Is Photoshop.exe "interpretable" by anybody with a copy (of windows)? How about a binary that's been heavily decompiled, like a Mario game?
Don't get me wrong, llama is at least more open than OpenAI and that may be meaningful.
Photoshop, or any compiled binary, isn't meant to be open source and the code isn't meant to be reviewable. Llama is called open source, though the most important part isn't publicly available for review. If llama didn't claim to be open source I don't think it would matter that the model itself and all the weights aren't available.
If your argument is just that most software is shipped as compiled and/or obfuscated code, sure that's how it is usually done. That isn't considered open source though, and the line with LLMs seems to be very gray - it can be "open source" if the source code for the training logic is available even though the actual code/model being run can't be reviewed or interpreted.
Personally I can't say I care as much about what the training set is, I want to know what's actually in the model and used at runtime/interpretation.
When I said "it's not really open source", I was referring to the fact that there are restrictions on who can use Llama.