Calls it "Deepsneak", failing to make it clear that the reason people love Deepseek is that you can download and it run it securely on any of your own private devices or servers - unlike most of the competing SOTA AIs.

I can't speak for Proton, but the last couple weeks are showing some very clear biases coming out.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] v_krishna@lemmy.ml 11 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

In deep learning generally open source doesn't include actual training or inference code. Rather it means they publish the model weights and parameters (necessary to run it locally/on your own hardware) and publish academic papers explaining how the model was trained. I'm sure Stallman disagrees but from the standpoint of deep learning research DeepSeek definitely qualifies as an "open source model"

[–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 11 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Just because they call it Open Source does not make it. DeepSeek is not Open Source, it only provides model weights and parameters, not any source code and training data. I still don't know whats in the model and we only get "binary" data, not any source code. This is not Libre software.

[–] Sal@mander.xyz 7 points 2 hours ago

There is a nice (even if by now already a bit outdated) analysis about the openness of different "open source" generative AI projects in the following article: Liesenfeld, Andreas, and Mark Dingemanse. "Rethinking open source generative AI: open washing and the EU AI Act." The 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. 2024.

[–] joyjoy@lemm.ee 5 points 2 hours ago

So "Open Source" to AI is just releasing a .psd file used to export a jpeg, and you need some other proprietary software like Photoshop in order to use it.