391·
11 days agoCall it “open weight” if you want, but it’s not “fully open”. The training data is still proprietary, and the model can’t be accurately reproduced. It’s proprietary in the same way that llama is proprietary.
trevor
Hello, tone-policing genocide-defender and/or carnist 👋
Instead of being mad about words, maybe you should think about why the words bother you more than the injustice they describe.
Have a day!
- 0 Posts
- 3 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
Cake day: June 10th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
Does Mistral actually provide the training datasets, or are they using the fake definition of “”“open source AI”“” that the OSI has massaged into being as megacorp friendly as possible?
You can also fork proprietary code that is source available (depending on the specific terms of that particular proprietary license), but that doesn’t make it open source.
Fair point about llama not having open weights though. So it’s not as proprietary as llama. It still shouldn’t be called open source if the training data that it needs to function is proprietary.