you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 1 point 4 days ago (1 child)

That distinction is totally correct in principle, but in practice almost no frontier model releases its training data because of licensing, privacy, and sheer scale. Today, Open Weight AI has become the common compromise: useful for research and local use, even if it falls well short of the traditional open source definition.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 days ago (1 child)
  • [–] [S] 0 points 4 days ago (1 child)

    There are lots of awesome OSAI! But today, they are completely outperformed by OWAI and closed AI. My guess: that won’t change in future.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 days ago (1 child)

    For me, I'm going to be one of those hardliners who refuses to use closed source AI no matter how much better than open source it is.

    Back when I was first learning about computers and operating systems and software, I did not care so much about open source or understand it and why it was important, so therefore I've made decisions that now I have trouble getting away from some closed source programs, and I refused to do the same thing with AI that I did back then.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] -1 points 4 days ago (1 child)

    I can totally understand that. Personally, however, it’s particularly important to me at the moment to switch from the cloud to local hardware.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 days ago

    Oh yeah, sure, and you can absolutely run open-weight models on your own hardware, which is definitely an improvement from having to use an API from a company. But for me personally, I won't touch even open-weight models because they're not fully open source, and fuck that.

    For me, it's open source or GTFO.

  • source
  • parent