←back to thread

Meta's open AI hardware vision

(engineering.fb.com)
240 points GavCo | 2 comments | 15 Oct 24 18:08 UTC | HN request time: 0.407s | source
Show context
Gee101 ◴[15 Oct 24 18:46 UTC] No.41851793[source]▶
Zuckerberg and Facebook gets a lot of hate but at least they invest a lot into engineering and open source.
replies(6): >>41852156 #>>41852273 #>>41852671 #>>41852972 #>>41853469 #>>41855820 #
diggan ◴[15 Oct 24 20:51 UTC] No.41852972[source]▶
> and open source

I'm kind of split about this. Yes, Facebook done a lot of great Open Source in the past, and I'm sure they'll do more great Open Source in the future.

But it's really hard to see them in a positive light when they keep misleading people about Llama, and publish blog posts that say how important Open Source is etc etc, then refuse to actually release Llama as Open Source, refuse to elaborate on why they see it as Open Source while no one else does it and refuse to take a step back and understand how the FOSS community feels when they actively mislead people like this.

replies(2): >>41854421 #>>41858500 #
1. a2128 ◴[16 Oct 24 12:51 UTC] No.41858500[source]▶
To provide an example, the recent Llama3.2 release includes a clause in their acceptable use policy that says any individual or business located in EU has no rights to use their multimodal models. This is discrimination against persons/groups which violates most open source definitions. They even went as far as getting Huggingface to implement georestrictions so that EU users would get an error message and be unable to download the weights.

From my understanding this comes from a feud with EU privacy law because Facebook wants to train models on EU users data, but GDPR makes that complicated (see their letter at euneedsai.com). So they made this license change to "punish" the EU.

replies(1): >>41859100 #
2. diggan ◴[16 Oct 24 13:58 UTC] No.41859100[source]▶
Not to mention that they are discriminating against fields of endeavors, and also requiring anyone that uses Llama in any shape or form to display "Built with Llama" prominently.

As far as I know, no one does that (https://ollama.com as an example of a platform that breaks Llama's terms and conditions) and Meta isn't enforcing it. But who knows, they might do so in the future.

Not sure how any sane person can claim Llama is Open Source after realizing these things.