Hi Maxim,
Maxim Cournoyer skribis:
> Ludovic Courtès writes:
[...]
>> Yes, the problem is machine-learning output comes up more and more
>> frequently.
>>
>> I agree we need to come up with a policy (I’m a bit torn on this and not
>> too sure what I’d put in there.) Maybe we should set up a
Hi,
Simon Tournier skribis:
> Somehow, I do not any difference with the package ’gnubg’ for example;
> well my opinion is expressed in this thread [1]:
Would you like to (co-)lead a working group (maybe with Nathan, maybe
with help from free software folks outside the project too) on this
> >You can always check what kind of data the program gives to the
> >neural network as the program is free software. If the data is valid
> >runtime input it is also valid training data.
>
> That's not necessarily true. Like an image generating program will be
> trained on image + caption pairs,
>You can always check what kind of data the program gives to the neural
network as the program is free software. If the data is valid runtime
input it is also valid training data.
That's not necessarily true. Like an image generating program will be
trained on image + caption pairs, but running
> >If you know how to convert the blob to weights in the neural network
> >(something the program has to do to make any use of the blob) and know
> >the error function, you can continue the training with new data.
>
> Yeah, I get that, but you don't necessarily know what the weights
> mean. Let's
>If you know how to convert the blob to weights in the neural network
(something the program has to do to make any use of the blob) and know
the error function, you can continue the training with new data.
Yeah, I get that, but you don't necessarily know what the weights
mean. Let's charitably
> Is this even practically possible? How do you re-train a blob you know
> nothing about? To me this sounds similar to saying a compiled binary
> is free software if the license allows you to decompile it and
> deobfuscate it.
If you know how to convert the blob to weights in the neural network
>No idea whether this is FSF's official stand but in a talk[0] Richard
Stallman said that the training data is not relevant as long as the
network can be tweaked by retraining, i.e. the weights are licesenced so
that modifications are allowed.
Is this even practically possible? How do you
> We should ask what is the FSF's opinion about it, if they have one.
> personally see trained data models as data more than code; so when their
> licensing allows them to be redistributed I see no objection to package
> them in Guix.
No idea whether this is FSF's official stand but in a talk[0]
Nathan Dehnel writes:
> Perhaps such greyzone objects that can't be fully regenerated should
> be put in their own channel so users know where they are and it
> doesn't become a mystery how many they have installed on their
> systems.
I would want put a variant of the opencv package in the
Perhaps such greyzone objects that can't be fully regenerated should
be put in their own channel so users know where they are and it
doesn't become a mystery how many they have installed on their
systems.
Hi Guix,
I’d like to draw your attention to https://issues.guix.gnu.org/64945.
It’s a patch that adds binary descriptors to OpenCV.
These descriptors are the result of a very expensive computation, which
could be performed with lots of memory and GPUs. The result is a small
number of very small
12 matches
Mail list logo
