Why Mark Zuckerberg wants to redefine open source so badly

[buddascrayon@lemmy.world]

when the data used to train the AI is copyrighted, how do you make it open source? it's a valid question.

It is actually possible to reveal the source of training data without showing the data itself. But I think this is a bit deeper since I'll bet all of my teeth that the training data they've used is literally the 20 years of Facebook interactions and entries that they have just chilling on their servers. Literally 3+ billion people's lives are the training data.

[itdidnttrickledown@lemmy.world]

Is it for control, money? Of course it is.

[xavier666@lemm.ee]

Luigi: Someone asked for cancer extermination?

[rageagainstmachines@lemmy.world]

Fuck off, Fuckerberg.

[foobarrington@lemmy.world]

I agree that we should incentivize open source work, but my worry is that by legitimizing partial open source as "open source", you're disincentivizing fully open source work. After all, why put in the effort if you'll get the same result with way less work?

The incentive you're asking for is a disincentive against full open source, and I can guarantee you that if the existing "open source" term wasn't defended by hardliners, there'd be far less open source work in the wild than we have today.