• 2 Posts
  • 29 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: March 26th, 2024

help-circle





  • I’m a big fan of buying power tools twice. I happen to go Ryobi for the first round but Harbor Freight / Northern Tool are probably similar.

    If you can stand the fuss, buy corded tools and skip the brand loyalty that comes with batteries.

    The biggest killer of cheaper power tools is generally heat. There are plastic components in the drive train. They hold up great to short jobs, but heat is their kryptonite. If you let a Ryobi tool cool down whenever you notice it getting warm to the touch it’ll last a long time. If you need to run a tool for hours at a time then skip the fuss and go straight to a more brand with a good reputation like DeWalt, Makita, Bosch, or Milwaukee.







  • Please don’t assume anything, it’s not healthy.

    Explicitly stating assumptions is necessary for good communication. That’s why we do it in research. :)

    it depends on the license of that binary

    It doesn’t, actually. A binary alone, by definition, is not open source as the binary is the product of the source, much like a model is the product of training and refinement processes.

    You can’t just automatically consider something open source

    On this we agree :) which is why saying a model is open source or slapping a license on it doesn’t make it open source.

    the main point is that you can put closed source license on a model trained from open source data

    1. Actually the ability to legally produce closed source material depends heavily on how the data is licensed in that case
    2. This is not the main point, at all. This discussion is regarding models that are released under an open source license. My argument is that they cannot be truly open source on their own.

  • Quite aggressive there friend. No need for that.

    You have a point that intensive and costly training process plays a factor in the usefulness of a truly open source gigantic model. I’ll assume here that you’re referring to the likes of Llama3.1’s heavy variant or a similarly large LLM. Note that I wasn’t referring to gigantic LLMs specifically when referring to “models”. It is a very broad category.

    However, that doesn’t change the definition of open source.

    If I have an SDK to interact with a binary and “use it as [I] please” does that mean the binary is then open source because I can interact with it and integrate it into other systems and publish those if I wish? :)