irrelevant. We’re talking about open in the sense of open-source not open-research, and even then, it’s still not relevant because were talking about the processes, not the product.
The post’s question was why do these companies use ‘open’ in their names. So, we aren’t actually talking about open in the case of open-source. We’re actually talking about why the companies have ‘open’ in their names.
no one cares about the specifics. nothing about openai is open.
…well, are they publishing the research still or not?
irrelevant. We’re talking about open in the sense of open-source not open-research, and even then, it’s still not relevant because were talking about the processes, not the product.
I thought we were talking about the word “open”. They don’t call themselves OpenSourceAI.
Not that I agree with them using the word “open” in their name, but it doesn’t seem as unjustified as you’re making it out to be.
Aux explained the reasoning though, and it sounds like it has kinda works given that there are (I believe) a number of alternative LLMs.
I do agree it is somewhat misleading though.
deleted by creator
The post’s question was why do these companies use ‘open’ in their names. So, we aren’t actually talking about open in the case of open-source. We’re actually talking about why the companies have ‘open’ in their names.
They do publish some open source software like Whisper TTS. Their core products are all proprietary though.
No one except apparently retiolus@lemmy.cat who asked the question.