No, please throw SourceTree into the garbage can.
No, please throw SourceTree into the garbage can.
But what's the point? GPT-OSS is regarded as a pretty bad open source model compared to the latest deepseek or qwen releases. Most attempts to use Reinforcement Learning or even any kind of post-training fail in that the data you have is of worse quality and quantity than the data that the model was originally trained on. So you get catastrophic forgetting and a model with lower general IQ than before fine-tuning.
This is true btw even if you use lora or better techniques to supposedly "mitigate" catastrophic forgetting. Even pyreft/reft, which in some cases impact only 0.001% of a models parameters, cause these kind of issues in my experiments.
So why should anyone except AI researchers and the big 4 AI providers care about fine-tuning? The vast majority of people who think they need fine-tuning need good quality RAG/Agentic RAG systems, since they can trivially add or remove data to their model (machine unlearning doesn't work yet), also ground models and objectively makes them more accurate, and fully manipulate and manage how it's used in their prompts context. On top of that, vector DBs/embeddings "easily" scale to billions of records.
> What will the world will be like in the future is decided by us every day.
That's the problem.
This "us" you're referring to. People. They're the problem. They have no principles. They stand for nothing. They think they do, but the reality is their principles are easily compromised. They are highly susceptible to manipulation by way of emotion. Powerful emotions like terror and rage.
Conjure up some drug trafficking, money laundering, child molesting terrorist boogeyman and they'll compromise immediately. Suddenly freedom is being traded away for security. Suddenly free speech is no longer absolute. Then you see that these weren't principles that entire nations were founded upon, they were more like guidelines, thrown away at the first sign of inconvenience.
The harsh truth is that danger must not only be accepted but embraced in order to have true freedom and independence. The internet that connects us also connects criminals, the cryptography that protects us also protects criminals. There is no way around it. Compromise even a little and it's over.
People are the problem. They endlessly compromise on things. No ideal can ever be reached. It's an existential problem that cannot be solved.
To be an idealist is to be an extremist. Sadly people are not prepared to pay the costs of idealism. The ideal of a decentralized, encrypted and uncensorable communications medium, for example. It requires that they accept the cost that criminals will not only use it but be enabled by it. They won't accept it. Thus we march not towards the ideal but towards its opposite: centralized plain text surveilled and controlled communications.