From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jean Louis Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.tangents Subject: Re: Collaborative training of Libre LLMs (was: Is ChatGTP SaaSS? (was: [NonGNU ELPA] New package: llm)) Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2023 14:19:16 +0300 Message-ID: References: <87v8d0iqa5.fsf@posteo.net> <87cyz3vaws.fsf@localhost> <87a5tzsbvl.fsf@localhost> <87fs3n7i98.fsf@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="26934"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.10+64 (b470a9a) (2023-06-05) Cc: emacs-tangents@gnu.org, jporterbugs@gmail.com, ahyatt@gmail.com, team@khoj.dev To: Ihor Radchenko Original-X-From: emacs-tangents-bounces+get-emacs-tangents=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Sep 09 13:46:39 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: get-emacs-tangents@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qewQB-0006nb-II for get-emacs-tangents@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 09 Sep 2023 13:46:39 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qewPs-0005E0-86; Sat, 09 Sep 2023 07:46:20 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qew51-0007Sx-1m for emacs-tangents@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Sep 2023 07:24:47 -0400 Original-Received: from stw1.rcdrun.com ([217.170.207.13]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qew4y-0007ur-3n for emacs-tangents@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Sep 2023 07:24:46 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([::ffff:41.75.180.124]) (AUTH: PLAIN admin, TLS: TLS1.3,256bits,ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by stw1.rcdrun.com with ESMTPSA id 00000000000C5C1B.0000000064FC55D9.000010B0; Sat, 09 Sep 2023 04:24:09 -0700 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87fs3n7i98.fsf@localhost> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.170.207.13; envelope-from=bugs@gnu.support; helo=stw1.rcdrun.com X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 09 Sep 2023 07:46:18 -0400 X-BeenThere: emacs-tangents@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs news and miscellaneous discussions outside the scope of other Emacs mailing lists List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-tangents-bounces+get-emacs-tangents=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-tangents-bounces+get-emacs-tangents=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.tangents:1060 Archived-At: * Ihor Radchenko [2023-09-09 13:28]: > > By contrast, ChatGTP is neither a community project nor free/libre. > > That's perhaps why it arranges to manipulate people into "contributing" > > rather than letting them choose. > > Indeed, they do hold coercive power as people have no choice to copy run > the model independently. There is free software for that type of artificial intelligence. People do have choice. Llama, Llama 2, Alpaca, GPT4All, Dolly, Vicuna, etc. I think that "they do hold coercive power" is out of reality. To find out if they have coercive power you should find the victim of coercion and be able to tell name victim. The verb coerce has 1 sense (first 1 from tagged texts)p 1. (2) coerce, hale, squeeze, pressure, force -- (to cause to do through pressure or necessity, by physical, moral or intellectual means :"She forced him to take a job in the city"; "He squeezed her for information") Otherwise it sounds as propaganda. There are too many services online, nobody need to use them, I see there no coercion. > However, I do not care much about OpenAI corporate practices - they are > as bad as we are used to in other bigtech SaaSS companies. What might be > a more interesting question to discuss is actual genuine collaborative > effort training a libre (not ChatGTP) model. Their closed software example is followed by free software. I see that as positive not "as bad as we are ued to in other bigtech..." I do not see anything bad here, I see that company offers service and customers can freely decide to take service, or not. Keeping farms of servers for that purpose is very expensive. There must be some exchange between customers and company. Even Wikipedia, and GNU and free software projects needs funds to continue. -- Jean Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns In support of Richard M. Stallman https://stallmansupport.org/