Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by diggan 499 days ago
The same is true for FOSS in general. You're arguing that because no one (almost) builds their own X from scratch, there is therefore no value in having resources available for how to build your own X from scratch.

For someone who basically couldn't become a developer with FOSS, this way of thinking is so backwards, especially on Hacker News. I thought we were pro-FOSS in general, but somehow LLMs get a pass because "they're too complicated and no one would build one from scratch".
1 comments
dismalaf 499 days ago
They get a pass because we know what these companies train on (proprietary or private data) but they can't admit it, but they're still giving away multi million dollar models for free.

Yes, it'd be nice if it was open and reproducible from start to finish. But let's not let perfect be the enemy of good.

link
diggan 499 days ago
> Yes, it'd be nice if it was open and reproducible from start to finish. But let's not let perfect be the enemy of good.

"Let's not let companies exploit well-known definitions for their own gain" is what I'm going for, regardless if we personally gain from it or not.

link
hiq 499 days ago
I still don't understand why they have to mix definitions to confuse developers, and we on top of that apparently have to give up on the true meaning of FOSS. What's so hard about using the term "open weights" or some new term instead of trying to reuse FOSS terms they don't abide to?
link