magic_lobster_party

They’re throwing stones at people they disagree with

The incredible thing about this chainsaw is that no two people use it the same way. You think you knew most things about the chainsaw until you see someone else use it. They use a completely different technique, holding it in a way you never considered a possibility, and use buttons you didn’t know were even there - let alone what they are for. They’re equally mystified in terror when they see you use the chainsaw.

Yes

Anything containing words is a meme

IMO, the original is the best one. I think all variations are just over designed. HTML default settings aren’t that bad.

What’s so refreshing about motherfucking website is that I feel no need to activate ”reader mode” just to make the site bearable. Basic HTML is perfect as it is.

No need to be sorry. It pisses me off as well.

It’s just extra customization options in the character creation screen. If you don’t want to use it, don’t use it. For some, these extra options are great additions. Why go great lengths to deny their enjoyment?

As long they don’t add pronouns. God forbid grammar in my games.

I don’t use it much myself, but I’m often surprised how many others use ChatGPT in their job. I don’t believe it’s an extreme minority.

It’s an annoying subset of people in tech.

They’re usually quick on the latest fads and buzzwords. They pose themselves as technical innovators, when they’re not really innovating anything. They’re just chasing trends and hope they can make some quick money while the hype is still strong. Technical skill is optional.

You often find these in LinkedIn.

For better or worse, AI is here to stay. Unlike NFTs, it’s actually used by ordinary people - and there’s no sign of it stopping anytime soon.

What do you mean? The sky is obviously red and yellow.

ML stands for Marxist Leninism, so that’s a clue

There’s usually randomness involved with the initial weights and the order the data is processed.

Ok I understand now why people are upset. There’s a disagreement with terminology.

The source code for the model is open source. It’s defined in PyTorch. The source code for it is available with the MIT license. Anyone can download it and do whatever they want with it.

The weights for the model are open, but it’s not open source, as it’s not source code (or an executable binary for that matter). No one is arguing that the model weights are open source, but there seem to be an argument against that the model is open source.

And even if they provided the source code for the training script (and all its data), it’s unlikely anyone would reproduce the same model weights due to randomness involved. Training model weights is not like compiling an executable, because you’ll get different results every time.

The model is as far as I know open, even for commercial use. This is in stark contrast with Meta’s models, which have (or had?) a bespoke community license restricting commercial use.

Or is there anything that can’t be done with the DeepSeek model that I’m unaware of?

If the installer is open source, then that part is open source. It’s maybe not as useful, because it relies on proprietary software to work. On the other hand, so does emulators like Dolphin.

Windows is not open source just because it’s possible to change dll files. Minecraft is not open source just because it’s possible to modify its textures.

Model weights isn’t the equivalent to a proprietary DLL or GameCube ROM. Anyone is free to modify and distribute the model weights however they like - and people are already doing it. Soon enough we will see variations of the model without the Chinese censor for example.

I agree the bad part is that they didn’t provide the script to train the model from scratch.

Yeah, it’s about as open source as binary blobs.

This is a great starting point for further improvements of the model. Most AI research is done with pretrained weights used as basis. Few are training models completely from scratch. The model is built with Torch, so anyone should be able to fine tune the model on custom data sets.

I think a more appropriate analogy is if you make an open source game. With the game you have made textures, because what is a game without textured surfaces? You include the binary jpeg images along with the source code.

You’ve made the textures with photoshop, which is a closed source application. The textures also features elements of stock photos. You don’t provide the original stock photos.

Anyone playing the game is free to replace the textures with their own. The game will have a different feel, but it’s still a playable game. Anyone is also free to modify the existing textures.

Would you consider this game closed source?

They published the source code needed run the model. It’s open source in the way that anyone can download the model, run it locally, and further build on it.

Training from scratch costs millions.