Hook

Their other posts in the index, biggest breakout first.
Wined way of saying, I I don't think open source works the same way in in AI that it has worked in other areas. PRIMARILY because with open source you can you can see the, you know, you can see the source code of the model. Here, we can't see inside the model. Um, you know, it's often called open weights instead of open source to kind of distinguish that. But a lot of the benefits which is that many people can work on it, that it's kind of additive. It doesn't quite work in the same way. Um, so you know, I've I've It's actually always seen it as a red herring. When I see it when I see a new model come out, I don't care whether it's open source or not. Like if we talk about deep sea, I don't think it matters that deep sea is open source. I think I ask, is it a good model? Is it better than us at at, you know, the things that that's the only thing that I care about, it it actually, it actually doesn't doesn't matter either way. Um because ultimately, you have to you have to host it on the cloud, the people who host it on a cloud do inference. These are big models, they're hard to do inference on. And conversely, many of the things that you can do when you see the weights, um, uh, you know, were increasingly offering on clouds where you can find tune the model, you can, you know, um, you know, we're even looking at at ways to, you know, to to kind of, you know, investigate the activations of the model as part of like an interpretability interface, we did some little things around steering last time. Um, so I think it's the wrong access to think in terms of when I think about competition, I think about like which models are good at the task that we do. Um I think open source is actually a red hearing. But if it's free and cheap to run. It's not free. You have to you have to you have to you have to run it on interference and someone someone has to make it fast on interference. All right.