Technology

61632 readers

5451 users here now

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

Our Rules

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

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

L3s@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

technopagan@lemmy.world

L4s@lemmy.world

352

Why Mark Zuckerberg wants to redefine open source so badly (www.zdnet.com)

submitted 16 hours ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to c/technology@lemmy.world

58 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

when the data used to train the AI is copyrighted, how do you make it open source?

When part of my code base belongs to someone else, how do I make it open source? By open sourcing the parts that belong to me, while clarifying that it's only partially open source.

[–] kava@lemmy.world 1 points 7 minutes ago

This is essentially what Llama does, no? The reason they are attempting a clarification is because they would be subject to different regulations depending on whether or not it's open source.

If they open source everything they legally can, then do they qualify as "open source" for legal purposes? The difference can be tens of millions if not hundreds of millions of dollars in the EU according to Meta.

So a clarification on this issue, I think, is not asking for so much. Hate Facebook as much as the next guy but this is like 5 minute hate material