Am I wrong of this is a massive trend with companies developing AI backends?
They release a previous version, free and open source. Then make a next version completely locked down. Do they event want progress?
They want private progress. They want to be the industry leader in whatever it is. They're not progressing humanity, they're making a great fiscal quarter.
Llama 2 is more "open" than Llama 1. Llama 1 was just leaked, and technically not supposed to be available to the public. Llama 2 is actually officially released, even though there are restrictions in the license.
Actually did not know this
In fairness, they didn't release anything open at all.
As The Register noted earlier, the community agreement forbids the use of Llama 2 to train other language models; and if the technology is used in an app or service with more than 700 million monthly users, a special license is required from Meta. It's also not on the Open Source Initiative's list of open source licenses.
I'm having a hard time caring about those exemptions...
Maybe you don't care, but the OSI definition does.
Am I wrong of this is a massive trend with companies developing AI backends?
They release a previous version, free and open source. Then make a next version completely locked down. Do they event want progress?
They want private progress. They want to be the industry leader in whatever it is. They're not progressing humanity, they're making a great fiscal quarter.
Llama 2 is more "open" than Llama 1. Llama 1 was just leaked, and technically not supposed to be available to the public. Llama 2 is actually officially released, even though there are restrictions in the license.
Actually did not know this
In fairness, they didn't release anything open at all.
I'm having a hard time caring about those exemptions...
Maybe you don't care, but the OSI definition does.