undefined | Better HN

0 pointswsgeorge2y ago0 comments

> initially with a super shady royalty license

I'm surprised this opinion still persists. Royalty-based licenses have been used by major game engines [0] for a long time, so that's not unprecedented.

[0] https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/license, https://www.cryengine.com/support/view/licensing

0 comments

version_five2y ago

This isn't the first time I've seen this brought up. It's irrelevant here for so many reasons. It it unprecedented in ML models, the model was promoted as open source, the terms were absurd (10% for anything related to it plus some reporting requirements, for a foundation model that's not even tuned to anything).

In any event, bringing shitty practices from another industry into ML doesn't seem worth supporting.

Zuiii2y ago

> In any event, bringing shitty practices from another industry into ML doesn't seem worth supporting.

Why is this still an issue for you?

All players made licensing blunders in the past and the fine folks behind falcon seem to have learned from their mistake by releasing their weights under Apache 2.0, a well understood and respected permissive license.

Many major open source projects started as proprietary software that eventually went opensource. Why hold a grudge against this project specifically? Yes, they made a mistake and learned from it. What more do you want?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse