Would you accept the argument that compiling is modifying the bytes in the memory space reserved for an executable?

I can edit the executable at the byte level if I so desire, and this is also what compilers do, but the developer would instead be modifying the source code to make changes to the program and then feed that through a compiler.

Similarly, I can edit the weights of a neural network myself (using any tool I want) but the developers of the network would be altering the training dataset and the training code to make changes instead.

> And most importantly, you modify the work just like the creators modify the work

Emphasis mine.

Weights are not open source.

You can define terms to mean whatever you want, but fundametally if you cannot modify the “output” the way the original creators could, its not in the spirit of open source.

Isnt that literally what you said?

How can you possibly claim both that a) you can modify it the creators did, b) thats all you need to be open source, but…

Also c) the categorically incorrect assertion that the weights allow you to do this?

Whatever, I guess, but your argument is logically wrong, and philosophically flawed.