You are not logged in.

#1 2019-06-03 04:54:23

johnraff
nullglob
From: Nagoya, Japan
Registered: 2015-09-09
Posts: 6,019
Website

Deep Learning and free software

I've only skimmed this so far but it raises some important issues. Deep learning can go beyond our ability to audit whether software is free or not (or something neutral ).

Anyway, a first draught of a Debian policy:
https://salsa.debian.org/lumin/deeplearning-policy


John
--------------------
( a boring Japan blog , Japan Links, idle twitterings  and GitStuff )
In case you forget, the rules.

Offline

#2 2019-06-03 05:48:14

hhh
Meep!
Registered: 2015-09-17
Posts: 8,662
Website

Re: Deep Learning and free software

This is a great link. It is well simplified, yet the content is still complicated enough that it will take me multiple readings to digest it.

Offline

#3 2019-06-03 06:33:10

ohnonot
...again
Registered: 2015-09-29
Posts: 4,129
Website

Re: Deep Learning and free software

So some software that sifts through packages to find out if they contain non-free stuff???

I clicked through some links and ended up here.
Reading the following messages, I once again notice that people tend to lump Free (capital F) Software, Open Source and The GPL into one big thing.
Surely Software can be Open Source even if it has a different license?

Offline

#4 2019-06-03 06:48:37

johnraff
nullglob
From: Nagoya, Japan
Registered: 2015-09-09
Posts: 6,019
Website

Re: Deep Learning and free software

For sure there are other free software licences than the GPL, which is just the most popular (and possibly strongest?).

Last edited by johnraff (2019-06-03 06:49:00)


John
--------------------
( a boring Japan blog , Japan Links, idle twitterings  and GitStuff )
In case you forget, the rules.

Offline

#5 2019-06-03 06:54:39

ohnonot
...again
Registered: 2015-09-29
Posts: 4,129
Website

Re: Deep Learning and free software

Yes but I keep seeing people blaming software projects for applying a different license, saying "it's not opensource".
Or getting upset when someone says: "my software is opensource, but you're still not allowed to do that. it's in the license."

- anyhow, did i understand correctly that that is what your link is about? sniffing out licenses from packages through "deep learning" (yet another buzzword i'm sure)?

Offline

#6 2019-06-03 07:07:11

johnraff
nullglob
From: Nagoya, Japan
Registered: 2015-09-09
Posts: 6,019
Website

Re: Deep Learning and free software

I get the impression it's about the huge blobs of data that can be generated by running an algorithm for weeks (so DL is not a meaningless buzzword), and the difficulty of testing what exactly is in there. The basis of Open Source is surely reproducability - that anyone with the original source code can generate the same executable binary? Proving that struck me as being the main thrust of the ffpeg mail thread you linked.
(I find mailing list threads very irksome to read btw. It's uncool to say, but I think it's much easier to scroll down through a web forum page.)

Up till now a checksum has been enough to guarantee that two binary blobs are identical, but what if such a check also takes weeks to run?

So, the exact licence that the original source code is released under is a seconday issue, I think.

But the original linked README goes into it all much more carefully.

Imagine a Debian facial recognition package. That might be possible to release as open source I guess. But what about a data base of known faces, generated by running that free software on a huge collection of photos? How to check, from that data base, if each of those photos was freely available?

Last edited by johnraff (2019-06-03 07:16:55)


John
--------------------
( a boring Japan blog , Japan Links, idle twitterings  and GitStuff )
In case you forget, the rules.

Offline

#7 2019-06-05 03:37:31

glittersloth
...always giving it to you straight
Registered: 2015-09-30
Posts: 890

Re: Deep Learning and free software

johnraff wrote:

For sure there are other free software licences than the GPL, which is just the most popular (and possibly strongest?).

Depending on how nuanced your own definition of "free software" is (freedom for the code vs freedom for the developer), the GPL might not even be the most popular now. While I haven't seen any recent graphs/charts, I'd wager the more permissive MIT has overtaken GPL, judging from what I've casually observed, especially with regards to code used in web and mobile.

Offline

#8 2019-06-05 04:30:35

johnraff
nullglob
From: Nagoya, Japan
Registered: 2015-09-09
Posts: 6,019
Website

Re: Deep Learning and free software


John
--------------------
( a boring Japan blog , Japan Links, idle twitterings  and GitStuff )
In case you forget, the rules.

Offline

#9 2019-06-06 05:59:16

ohnonot
...again
Registered: 2015-09-29
Posts: 4,129
Website

Re: Deep Learning and free software

johnraff wrote:

Imagine a Debian facial recognition package. That might be possible to release as open source I guess. But what about a data base of known faces, generated by running that free software on a huge collection of photos? How to check, from that data base, if each of those photos was freely available?

I see.
Yes, it was a similar theme on the ffmpeg mailing list (I picked randomly from the provided examples).
Difficult I'm sure.
Big Data and Deep Learning... I'm still with Deep Thought and 42.

Offline

#10 2019-06-07 00:02:47

hhh
Meep!
Registered: 2015-09-17
Posts: 8,662
Website

Re: Deep Learning and free software

IIRC, papanom released his later scripts using http://www.wtfpl.net/

Offline

#11 2019-06-07 00:39:38

johnraff
nullglob
From: Nagoya, Japan
Registered: 2015-09-09
Posts: 6,019
Website

Re: Deep Learning and free software

^That non-licence undermines what the GPL people were trying to achieve IMO.


John
--------------------
( a boring Japan blog , Japan Links, idle twitterings  and GitStuff )
In case you forget, the rules.

Offline

#12 2019-06-07 01:01:23

hhh
Meep!
Registered: 2015-09-17
Posts: 8,662
Website

Re: Deep Learning and free software

Right, just a matter of history. I like the GPL, it's what we should stick with, it's what Debian primarily uses...

https://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/

Creative Commons as well...

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB