Oh my god, stop being a proscriptivist about this. Open source is not the same as free software. You're thinking of FLOSS.
jsomae
joined 1 year ago
no it isn't. The old versions are still GPL. permission from contributors was attained.
Note that
- Permission was attained from contributors, and
- Forks prior to this change are still under GPL naturally.
So what's the controversy, really?
what's underage for hrt? like.. 12?
The conversation was not originally about OSD; I had just mentioned it.
You do too by using the term FOSS instead of FLOSS
Touchée. But FLOSS the term only emphasises even more: there's open source software, and then there's free/libre open source software -- note the distinction.
This I can believe tbh. It's a very useful tool in the hands of an expert. Otherwise it's like giving a chimp a gun.
Maybe this is why I am surprised at people's hatred of ChatGPT. It's borne of misuse of a tool for experts, like newcomers struggling with a C++ compiler error.
like, a video of Tao giving a demonstration?
LLMs are basically just good pattern matchers. But just like how A* search can find a better path than a human can by breaking the problem down into simple steps, so too can an LLM make progress on an unsolved problem if it's used properly and combined with a formal reasoning engine.
I'm going to be real with you: the big insight behind almost all new mathematical ideas is based on the math that came before. Nothing is truly original the way AI detractors seem to believe.
By "does some reasoning steps," OpenAI presumably are just invoking the LLM iteratively so that it can review its own output before providing a final answer. It's not a new idea.
I do agree that grad students don't exactly live in luxury, and frequently develop mental health crises. But their contributions and insight are what power their labs. Profs often have to spend so much time teaching and chasing grants that they can't do much real research. Academia overall is in a sad state.
But Tao is a superstar, and a charismatic blogger. I'd be disappointed to learn he mistreats his grad students. (I don't know if he even has any tbh)
If this were true, we wouldn't need the term "FOSS."
You're talking about the OSD presumably. Stallman's definition differs, and I think his terminology seems to be widely used.
U.S. vehicles currently emit 2 billion tons. So that's very bad news.
However -- I think 2030 is waaay too far in the future to predict anything about AI.
See discussion here. Open Source is a valid term for this. Don't police perfectly innocent and common use of language please.