On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:37:41PM -0700, Mo Zhou wrote: > - The datasets used for training a "ToxicCandy" may be > private/non-free and not everybody can access them. (This case is more > likely a result of problematic upstream licensing, but it sometimes > happens). > > One got a free model from internet. That little candy tastes sweet. > One wanted to make this candy at home with the provided recipe, but > surprisingly found out that non-free ingredients are inevitable. > -- ToxicCandy
I'm not so sure this model would be unacceptable. It's no different than a game's image being a photo of a tree in your garden -- not reproducible by anyone but you (or someone you invite). Or, a wordlist frequency produced by analyzing results of a google search. At some point, the work becomes an entity on its own rather than the result of processing some dataset. A more ridiculous argument: the input is a project requirement sheet, the neural network being four pieces of wetware, working for 3 months. Do you insist on _this_ being reproducible, or would you accept the product as free software? Sufficiently advanced artificial intelligence might be not that different. 喵! -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Latin: meow 4 characters, 4 columns, 4 bytes ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Greek: μεου 4 characters, 4 columns, 8 bytes ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ Runes: ᛗᛖᛟᚹ 4 characters, 4 columns, 12 bytes ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Chinese: 喵 1 character, 2 columns, 3 bytes <-- best!
