alt Hacker News> against the spirit of science to keep them from the general public
Within science, participants have always published descriptions of methodology and results for review and replication. Within the same science, participants have never made access to laboratories free for everyone. You get blueprints for how to build a lab and what to do in it, you don't get the building.
Same for computation. I'm fairly sure almost all (if not all) algorithms in these suites are documented somewhere and you can implement them if you want. No one is restricting you from the knowledge. You just don't get the implementation for free.
Replies
> Same for computation....You just don't get the implementation for free.
software packages arent computation... whilst software takes time and effort (and money) to make, the finished product is virtually free to store and distribute. i see it similarly against the spirit of science. how is there more free software in the laymen space?
Notable OSS contributions should confer status and funding, like paper publications do.
Software is fundamentally different than lab equipment, just like PDFs are not paper journals that have to be printed, stored, and shipped. Most things in the digital domain have to be treated in a post-scarcity mindset, because they essentially are.
Software is the blueprint, execution is the machine.
This is why the incoming generation of AI engineers organizing autonomously and openly on git etc will decimate the dusty locked away AI academia generation.
The concept of heavy gatekeeping and attribution chasing seems asinine as knowledge generation and sharing isn't metered.
Generally I agree up until now where we appear to be treading on the threshold of AI being orders of magnitude more powerful. Given that, which has potential to displace large swaths of the labor force, I feel as though society deserves a larger return on investment.