@astro_ray @marvelous_coyote It seems you have the incorrect idea about what open-source means, which is quite sad here in the open-source lemmy community. Being trained on public domain material does NOT make the model open-source. It's about the license - what the recipients of the model are allowed to do with it - open-source must allow derivative works and commercial use, on top of seeing the code, but for LLM models the "code" is just a bunch of float numbers, nothing interesting to see.
@gomp try comparing it with apt install, not with downloading a .deb file from a random website - that is obviously also very insecure. But the main thing curl|sh will never have is verifying the signature of the downloaded file - what if the server got compromised, and someone simply replaced it. You want to make sure that it comes from the actual author (you still need to trust the author, but that's a given, since you are running their code). Even a signed tarball is better than curl|sh.
@over_clox The lack of redistribution is what's causing projects to disappear and die, vendor lock-in, walled gardens, bricked devices.. you clearly have no idea what you are talking about
"source available" licenses are making the commons MORE ransacked by corporations. Which direction do you want to go?
> I dont do backups
Well then... there is nothing good coming out of that decision. Good luck, lol.
There are many much safer ways of installing someone else's code than curl|bash. It doesn't even verify any signatures...
Oh damn, I always thought Apache2.0 will protect also the derivative works, but apparently I was wrong:
> You may add Your own copyright statement to Your modifications and may provide additional or different license terms and conditions for use, reproduction, or distribution of Your modifications, ...
@ReakDuck Yup, and that's a much better avenue to fight against the AI companies. Because fundamentally, this is almost impossible to avoid in the ML models. We should stop complaining about how they scraped copyrighted content, this complaint won't succeed until that legal loophole is removed. But when they reproduce copyrighted content, that could be fatal. And this applies also to reproducing GPL code samples by copilot for example.