On Friday, February 7, 2025 2:53:42 AM MST G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> At 2025-02-06T23:19:11-0700, dovencio.dosho...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Thursday, February 6, 2025 7:12:09 PM MST G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > Hi Soren,
> > >
> > > Thank you for the serious follow-up.
> > >
> > > [...]
>
> "G. Branden Robinson" wrote on 07/02/2025 at
> 17:41:41+0100:
> > Biases are often unconscious, whereas conflicts of interest are always
> > known to the person who has them.
Le Sat, Feb 08, 2025 at 12:55:38AM +0100, Pierre-Elliott Bécue a écrit :
> I don't think it's always clear to them.
A
"G. Branden Robinson" wrote on 07/02/2025 at
17:41:41+0100:
> [M-F-T set to -project; see https://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html ]
>
> At 2025-02-07T17:08:44+0100, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
>> I'm not sure I'd expect more from people than them saying who they
>> work for or defend.
>>
>> I'd not
> "Sam" == Sam Johnston writes:
Sam> On Fri, 7 Feb 2025 at 16:04, Stefano Zacchiroli
wrote:
>> I don't think we should focus our conversation on LLMs much, if
>> at all.
Sam> Just as the software vendor doesn't get to tell users what
Sam> constitutes an improvement for
On Fri, 7 Feb 2025, Sam Johnston wrote:
>On Fri, 7 Feb 2025 at 08:48, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>>
>> I’d like to remind you that these huge binary blobs still contain,
>> in lossily compressed form, illegally obtained and unethically
>> pre-prepared, copies of copyrighted works, whose licences are
On Sun, Feb 02, 2025 at 12:56:59AM -0500, M. Zhou wrote:
> (5) what is the actionable outcome of this generaal resolution?
Is this actually unclear? The linked text claims this issue is urgent -
usually, something is urgent because some issue demands action.
> (6) is a neutral tone necessary for
On Fri, 7 Feb 2025 at 16:04, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I don't think we should focus our conversation on LLMs much, if at all.
While I agree LLMs tend to be the tail wagging the dog in AI/ML
discussion, the thread focuses on LLMs and the resulting policy will
apply to them.
> The reason is tha
[M-F-T set to -project; see https://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html ]
At 2025-02-07T17:08:44+0100, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> I'm not sure I'd expect more from people than them saying who they
> work for or defend.
>
> I'd not, eg, expect some Canonical employee to refrain voting a GR
> because th
While I'm still digesting the very impactful (for me) message by the
other Sam (hartmans), a quick but important note on the following:
On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 01:35:00PM +0100, Sam Johnston wrote:
> "Large language models (LMs) have been shown to memorize parts of
> their training data, and when
Hi,
The next point release for "bookworm" (12.10) is scheduled for Saturday,
March 15th 2025. Processing of new uploads into bookworm-proposed-updates
will be frozen during the preceding weekend.
--
Jonathan Wiltshire j...@debian.org
Debian Developer
On Fri, 7 Feb 2025 at 08:48, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>
> I’d like to remindyou that these huge binary blobs still contain,
> in lossily compressed form, illegally obtained and unethically
> pre-prepared, copies of copyrighted works, whose licences are not
> honoured by the proposed implementations.
Sam Hartman wrote:
> TL;DR: I think it is important for Debian to consider AI models free
even if those models are based on models that do not release their
training data. In the terms of the DFSG, I think that a model itself is
often a preferred form of modification for creating derived works.
He
At 2025-02-06T23:19:11-0700, dovencio.dosho...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, February 6, 2025 7:12:09 PM MST G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> > Hi Soren,
> >
> > Thank you for the serious follow-up.
> >
> > [...]
> > > This includes participating in discussions about Debian policies
> > > that invo
13 matches
Mail list logo
