It's a good model though, would be nice with a refresh.
Also the Chinese models aren't following a typical American SaaS playbook which relies on free/cheap proprietary software for early growth. They are not just publishing their weights but also their code and often even publishing papers in Open Access journals to explicitly highlight what methods and advancements were made to accomplish their results
I think the Chinese models have to be more open to increase trust as everyone is worried they are feeding their very essence/soul into a Chinese copying machine.
Also China wants there to be viable competitors so that US can’t just dominate a potentially very important field. It’s a challenge to a unipolar USA dominated world.
Also it helps to spur Chinese companies in the all important microchip industry which is controlled by a very small number of companies at various steps in the supply chain.
I wonder too if it allows them to hold an ace in their hand as well in terms of threat/power for negotiations. As in, they can cause the whole house of cards to crumble, an economic nuclear weapon so to speak.
Finally, there is a certain amount of prestige involved too. China can compete or even win at a very complicated game. They use it to increase national pride and to project their advancing power status to other nations.
Anyways, just my thoughts. Interested in others thoughts.
Well, Musk v OpenAI kicks off in one week from now with the objective of forcing them back to their roots. A jury will be deciding whether a nonprofit accepting $50m - $100m of donations and then discarding their mission for an IPO is OK or not. Should be interesting.
Most*.
OpenAI, contrary to popular belief, actually used to believe in open research and (more or less) open models. GPT1 and GPT2 both were model+code releases (although GPT2 was a "staged" release), GPT3 ended up API-only.