this post was submitted on 05 Feb 2025
417 points (97.5% liked)

Technology

61632 readers
5216 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kava@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, but that model would never compete with the models that use copyrighted data.

There is a unfathomably large ocean of copyrighted data that goes into the modern LLMs. From scraping the internet to transcripts of movies and TV shows to tens of thousands of novels, etc.

That's the reason they are useful. If it weren't for that data, it would be a novelty.

So do we want public access to AI or not? How do we wanna do it? Zuck's quote from article "our legal framework isn't equipped for this new generation of AI" I think has truth to it

[–] jacksilver@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I mean using proprietary data has been an issue with models as long as I've worked in the space. It's always been a mixture of open weights, open data, open architecture.

I admit that it became more obvious when images/videos/audio became more accessible, but from things like facial recognition to pose estimation have all used proprietary datasets to build the models.

So this isn't a new issue, and from my perspective not an issue at all. We just need to acknowledge that not all elements of a model may be open.

[–] kava@lemmy.world 1 points 29 minutes ago

So this isn’t a new issue, and from my perspective not an issue at all. We just need to acknowledge that not all elements of a model may be open.

This is more or less what Zuckerberg is asking of the EU. To acknowledge that parts of it cannot be opened. But the fact that the code is opened means it should qualify for certain benefits that open source products would qualify for.