• Dran@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      17 hours ago

      “Open source” in ML is a really bad description for what it is. “Free binary with a bit of metadata” would be more accurate. The code used to create deepseek is not open source, nor is the training datasets. 99% of “open source” models are this way. The only interesting part of the open sourcing is the architecture used to run the models, as it lends a lot of insight into the training process, and allows for derivatives via post-training

    • Tony Bark@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      Yes, and no. Yes in that they’ve released the research papers, pretrained parameters and weights of the model itself. Which is more than I can say for “OpenAI.” But no in that it doesn’t include training data or other critical components. Luckily, they’ve shown how they did it which makes it easy for anyone else to reverse engineer the process. That’s what Altman is afraid of.