Sam Hartman <hartm...@debian.org> writes: > Dear lumin: > > First, thanks for all your work on AI and free software. > When I started my own AI explorations, I found your ML policy > inspirational in how I thought about AI and free software.
I'd like to pile on and repeat this sentiment; thank you, Mo! > With my Debian hat on, I don't really care whether base models are > considered free or non-free. I don't think it will be important for > Debian to include base-models in our archive. What I do care about is > what we can do with software that takes base models and adapts them > for a particular use case. I really struggle to follow this reasoning. What about this way of thinking does _not_ transfer to "classical" software? And why? Why isn't what you're saying an equally good (or, I claim, bad) argument for acceptance of classical software that is somehow derived from non-free software? (An actual real-world example that springs to mind might be so-called open source projects that start out with leaked source code from e.g. a proprietary game). Best, Gard
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
