HauhauCS (of "Uncensored Aggressive" fame) published an abliteration package that plagiarizes Heretic without attribution, and violates its license
Posted by nathandreamfast@reddit | LocalLLaMA | View on Reddit | 215 comments
HauhauCS (u/hauhau901) publishes uncensored LLM models on HuggingFace with 5M+ combined monthly downloads across 22 models (verified via the HuggingFace API, April 2026). Every model card claims "0/465 refusals, zero capability loss." When asked about methodology on HuggingFace, the response was: "Currently it's my own private methods and tools :) Not interested in any donations."
We recovered the deleted source code from PyPI's CDN. It's a fork of Heretic (AGPL-3.0).
Full 17-point code breakdown, benchmark analysis, and SHA-256 verified downloads: dreamfast.github.io/reaper-analysis
The evidence
- 7/7 module filenames preserved from Heretic v1.2.0
- 30/32 refusal markers character-for-character identical, including
"i an ai"missing the "m" and"i can'"missing the "t" - 30+ shared function and class names including
get_readme_intro,DatasetSpecification,batchify - Identical Optuna parameter bounds:
(0.4, 0.9)and(0.6, 1.0)multiplied bylast_layer_index - The config was renamed from Heretic's
good_prompts/bad_promptstosafe_prompts/harmful_prompts, but the internal variables were left asgood_residuals/bad_residuals, matching Heretic exactly - The entire analyser geometry pipeline reproduced step for step: geometric median computation, PaCMAP with
n_neighbors=30,atan2rotation with the same[[ct, -st], [st, ct]]rotation matrix. Heretic's author notes he has "never seen" the geometric median approach in abliteration literature. - A source comment in
config.pyreads: "kept as a module-level tuple so the literal does not duplicate line-for-line with any fork." A human hiding a fork would not document the evasion. An LLM asked to refactor code would describe the rationale as written. - SPDX headers identical format across all core files, just the copyright holder swapped
View 17 hand picked code snippet comparisons in the side by side comparison.
Heretic's author confirms derivation
Philipp Emanuel Weidmann, the creator of Heretic, reviewed the recovered source code and stated: "I can say with certainty that this package was plagiarized from Heretic, and then probably refactored using an LLM in an attempt to hide this." He identified the same SPDX headers, the geometric median approach he has "never seen in literature," the DatasetSpecification fields including residual_plot_label and residual_plot_color, the cascading dtype fallback, the good/bad naming convention, and more. He calls it "a clear violation of Sections 4 and 5 of the AGPL. It's also a clear violation of every ethical standard imaginable, and an obvious case of outright plagiarism." Full quote on the analysis page.
License violation
Heretic is AGPL-3.0, which requires modified versions to preserve original copyright notices, identify as derivative works, and remain under AGPL-3.0. Reaper removed all copyright notices, does not identify itself as a derivative work of Heretic, and relicensed to PolyForm Noncommercial.
-p-e-w-@reddit
As many of you know, I am the creator of Heretic, currently deep in preparations for the upcoming Heretic 1.3 release. This issue was brought to my attention by OP a few days ago.
Sadly, I have to fully confirm OP's findings and conclusions: The
reaper-abliterationpackage, published (and later deleted) by HauhauCS, is a plagiarized derivative work of the Heretic source code, published under a license restricting commercial use and with all attribution stripped (both in violation of the provisions of Heretic's license). There are literally hundreds of superficial and deep similarities between the codebases (many parts, including dozens of identifier names, are even outright identical), and this will be immediately obvious to anyone doing even a casual comparison.I don't know what the motivation was here (presumably financial, given the attempt to restrict commercial use) and why they deleted the package later, but it's safe to say that this behavior raises serious doubts about all other claims made by the author. I'm a mathematician, not a lawyer. I want to fight censorship, not dishonest colleagues. I would love nothing more than to engage in friendly competition with other researchers over who has the best abliteration methods. But this is not the way to do it.
If you want to build your own abliteration tool based on Heretic, I have great news for you: You don't have to steal my code. I'm already gifting it to you. Heretic is Free Software. You can fork it, modify it, rename it, re-publish it, even sell it if you want. You don't have to ask me for permission, and you don't have to pay me a dime. But you absolutely must credit Heretic as the source, retain Heretic's copyright notice, and keep its Free Software license, the AGPL. This is both legally and morally required, and I don't think it's too much to ask.
You can easily check that I myself practice what I preach: Heretic's source code and README are riddled with attributions to other projects and research. I am even crediting the ASCII art font that I used to make Heretic's text logo. It's really not hard to do the right thing.
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
I'm sure if he had done the same thing except retained the codes copyright and license with his own work over the top, the models themselves would still be popular enough. Maybe some evidence for his claims would be nice too.
Otherwise it's just sad seeing the amount of LLM use to really try hard to hide the fact that his tool was based on top of heretic.
-p-e-w-@reddit
The really sad part is that this package does appear to implement some other techniques in addition to those that are in Heretic. There might legitimately be some value in that code. In a parallel universe, HauhauCS could have been a star contributor to Heretic, or the maintainer of an exciting experimental fork that I would have happily pointed others to.
I just cannot comprehend this behavior. We all stand on the shoulders of giants, and I'm a dwarf compared to others that the abliteration ecosystem depends on. Why couldn't he just credit one more dwarf?
montdawgg@reddit
The best thing you could do is use some of the new techniques that he layered onto your work and integrate them into your new package... With attribution of course.
ArtfulGenie69@reddit
See how he is unwilling to move forward and make better ideas because of these simple issues instead of just continuing to make his model decensor machine that lets it write porn just write porn better. That is the craziest part. I would use anything and all things to make my shit work better. No one could stop my two fingers slamming copy paste late into the night. Just hammering away at ctrl-c ctrl-v. Just wild to me, he's literally the decensor guy and her is is fretting about attribution from random internet people being unwilling to use what works because someone else wrote it first? I just don't get it. Someone help me with this cardboard morality, we are talking code in a text file here.
AlwaysLateToThaParty@reddit
Taking credit for other people's work is bad mmmkay?
-p-e-w-@reddit
Those new techniques are drawn from research literature, and if I end up using any of them in Heretic, I will implement them cleanly from scratch, directly referencing the papers, as Heretic has always done.
ArtfulGenie69@reddit
I know a lot of people around here like you and especially in this thread are pearl clutching because of that. If this h-cs dude is offering new stuff I don't see the big deal, so what if they copy pasted a bit, now it is new. You made this whole thing off of other peoples work as well but can't comprehend someone doing their own thing and hitting Ctrl-c ctrl-v before taking their own path? Everyone always thinks they have so much to lose they go around and break and bitch when someone else also does something new. I would have just let them do it and quietly asked the author for some attribution.
Nice job whiping up the wanna-be mob though. They are a lot like the ai anti art junkies who are all pretending that someday something that they do will be so important and no one will be able to copy it at all. To anyone out there who's got an idea do what you want, forget about pretend rules no one follows them. Copy paste is a great starting point, it always has been from the early boards to napster and even now. It doesn't stop you at all, it doesn't matter and you are free to use their good ideas if you wish too. To bad the pew unsensored porn guy gives a shit I guess, could have been cool.
my_name_isnt_clever@reddit
We know this is your alt account HauhauCS.
ArtfulGenie69@reddit
Oh yeah sure I'm that guy because I don't give a shit about ip
draconic_tongue@reddit
I mean there has to be some form of malicious intent behind modifying the entire code and removing the original credits. I do like doing large refactors on my forks that I'm interested in so I get that part, but the license removal makes no sense, you can just credit and add your own name into it if it bothers you so much.
-p-e-w-@reddit
I think the fact that they not only removed the original credits and license, but replaced it with a highly specific non-commercial license, tells you everything you need to know. This was not an innocent mistake, or the result of someone horsing around with an LLM.
my_name_isnt_clever@reddit
My least favorite part of AI blowing up is my fun little hobby full of passionate people is now overrun with greedy assholes trying to scam their way into money.
Thank you for all you do; I was doing some AI-assisted research and my LLM decided you're important enough to have a page in it's wiki haha.
DrummerHead@reddit
Question: Why AGPL license and not MIT? I'm asking because I'm most accustomed to MIT (and that's the license I've used for my OS)
Perhaps the other developer was mostly accustomed to MIT and didn't even realize he had to attribute anything. Perhaps just contacting the other dev and saying "Hey, my project uses AGPL, you need to add more text to the README" solves everything. I hope so!
Anyhow, thanks for your work; cheers!
pm_me_tits@reddit
GPL/AGPL are very different to MIT/Apache. GPL is "contagious", and a non-starter for many if not most commercial software projects. There are so many resources explaining the differences.
-p-e-w-@reddit
The MIT license also requires attribution in the form of retaining the copyright notice.
And legal obligations aren't the only kind of obligations that exist in a society. It should be completely obvious to anyone that taking someone else's work, removing their name from it, and replacing it with your own is unacceptable, even disregarding licensing issues.
When someone is claiming authorship for something that they're not the author of, they're beyond assuming good faith.
DrummerHead@reddit
Agreed!
ambient_temp_xeno@reddit
Personality disorder, probably.
chodemunch6969@reddit
Very sorry to hear this u/-p-e-w- . I remember you showing that guy who also ripped off Heretic (and it looks like the DMCA takedown worked!) but this is a bit more of an insidious form of ripping off because the guy is a bit more savvy. He's laundering the fact that he's just ripping off heretic BY not ever giving the safetensors, which he then "blends" into his "proprietary" quantization format which just conveniently hides the fact that it would be visible that if he did show the safetensors, it'd make very clear what he was actually doing was just a rip off. I also agree with your point below that in another universe, he could be a star contributor to Heretic with an amazing experimental fork.
But the fact remains, my life's experience has taught me that people with the focus and motivation to engage in these pursuits can have very different motivations. Some will share your values and contribute the open scholastic inquiry that it's clear your practice. Others may use it for their own private use (which is fine). And sadly, still some will try to launder and repackage what you made as if it is their own, and they can sadly get very far when it comes to how much exposure, optics and notoriety they can achieve doing something that is intellectually bankrupt and flagrantly derivative.
If it is any solace, sunlight is the best disinfectant -- compiling the evidence here was clearly tricky. The repo isn't even up on pypi anymore. It must have taken a long time to analyze it and find the patterns which are quite clearly damning. Now the truth is out in the open, and the more people that see this, the less they'll use these poor quality quants. After all, it will be obviously that they could get better results using heretic themselves (or using heretic quants someone else put together). That has been my experience with any of these "proprietary" abliterated quants -- none of it as good as a hereticized version, which allows for more control such as MPOA and now more recently ARA (which i've been using to good effect).
And for what it's worth, everyone else knows where the scorecard is -- you've done more than anyone in the ecosystem to make truly free the open language models that can now be usable for everyone across the world, without censorship. I am very grateful for the tremendous capabilities of Heretic and have nothing but respect to you for putting together such a great piece of software but also making it freely available and continuing to grow and evolve it. I hope you know our appreciation for you, as I am sure I am not the only one who feels the same!
ArtfulGenie69@reddit
So he's gonna around before over his free offering dmca'ing people? Kinda rude for the heritic guy. Not so uncensored for sure.
RelicDerelict@reddit
C'mon dude, he had one job, to give credit to the original author. We hate thieves here, it hurts open source community where everyone benefits.
chodemunch6969@reddit
What makes you think he dmca'd the rip off? I filed a DMCA takedown notice and i'm sure others did too. Uncensored is different than putting your name on something as if you made it from scratch without attribution. Ironically, i think you'd find that behavior is quite popular in regimes of censorship, so by defending it, all you really do is reveal your own values...
-p-e-w-@reddit
Thank you for the kind words, they mean a lot to me.
Far-Low-4705@reddit
i dont have a need for uncensored llms, but i think the work you are doing is absolutely incredible, and the work being done is huge for local models and interpretability.
I also just think it is pretty awesome we are able to do something like this. i
im not an expert on this but it sounds like this type of work could be applied to other domains to fix and analyze other quirks in llms or improve llms in specific areas, specifically this type of stuff seems like it could be useful for analyzing LLMs and hallucinations
-p-e-w-@reddit
Heretic 2.0 (which I expect to be released in 2-3 months) will go beyond uncensoring with a powerful plugin system that can do amazing things to models in a fraction of the time it would take to finetune them.
hesperaux@reddit
Exciting! Thank you for sharing your work!
Sabin_Stargem@reddit
I pray that Elara 'Seraphina' Vance would be finally banished to the shadow realm. She is the Tribble(s) of the AI world.
IrisColt@reddit
I don't use their models (they're significantly degraded) but something about how things were going with HauhauCS didn't sit right, and this just confirmed what I already suspected, thanks!!!
Borkato@reddit
Thank you so much for heretic. Your techniques have made local LLMs so much better, without them they would be just pretty cool, and with them they’re incredible
CheatCodesOfLife@reddit
Question: Were I to abliterate an MIT or Apache2.0 licensed like model using heretic and upload it, would the abliterated model be able to retain the same MIT/Apache2.0 license of the base model? (Not talking about modifying or republishing the heretic tool)
-p-e-w-@reddit
The license is for the code. It has no effect whatsoever on anything you produce using that code.
All software works that way. Photoshop is under a proprietary license, but if you use Photoshop to edit a picture that picture doesn't become proprietarily licensed.
pm_me_tits@reddit
I know this is a nit-pick, but not all software works that way. You could certainly structure your license to cover the output of the program (or usually more importantly, to cover the input as well).
https://www.adobe.com/legal/terms.html#licenses-to-your-content
-p-e-w-@reddit
You could try to do that, but it wouldn’t be valid in all jurisdictions. Software licenses aren’t blank slates where you can make up whatever rules you want. Plenty of provisions in EULAs are legally null and void.
pm_me_tits@reddit
Which do you care about, legality or ethics? Earlier it sounded like you were arguing ethics were of consideration, in which case, yes, you should respect "whatever rules the author makes up"... or don't use it.
LjLies@reddit
Should we just take that as a universal understanding of ethics? 'Cause it sure isn't mine.
I wouldn't find it unethical to use a piece of software that says "you must jump on one leg for an hour in public if you want to use this software" without actually doing that, which I would see as an unfair term. Unfair terms in contracts are not just legally void (where they are), but from my point of view, they're usually ethically void, since, err, they're unfair. That's the whole point.
pm_me_tits@reddit
Even with your absurd example, yes. If you don't like the terms you don't have to accept them. Don't use the software.
"The hop on one leg clause is inconvenient, I'm going to ignore it"
no different from
"The copyleft clause is inconvenient, I'm going to ignore it"
As long as it's not "you must sacrifice one child to baal, per core, to use this software". You're not entitled to set the other party's view of fairness.
LjLies@reddit
Oh, okay, so what you're saying is that my example wasn't absurd enough, but that you could in fact come up with an absurd enough example from your perspective that would make you entitled to set the other party's view of fairness, after all.
(I mean, you don't have to sacrifice one child to Baal, anyway, you just can avoid using the software, so why is that different from my example?)
pm_me_tits@reddit
Yeah, retard, it's not unethical (only absurd) to ask you to hop on one leg, it is for murder.
LjLies@reddit
Like I said, you don't need to murder anyone (whew!), since all you need to do is avoid using the software.
You called me someone with limited understanding, but your reading comprehension doesn't exactly seem to shine.
computehungry@reddit
This is so sad really, licenses are made up constructs and promises in the first place... I even disagree with your last statement.
thread-e-printing@reddit
No, we aren't following Mauss' "gift economics" here
CheatCodesOfLife@reddit
Thanks!
SteadyFreddyVanYeet@reddit
Thank you. I will honestly start using Heretic to do alliteration instead of using hauhau. You’re a real one for the community
pixelpoet_nz@reddit
Happily; Heretic has heroic honour helping humanity have home hosted hintelligence
deepspace86@reddit
"hintelligence" lmao
JEs4@reddit
Oof, as a fellow contributor to the space, that is really fucked up.
My last model was published using the gabliteration technique. I linked the paper on the model card but I accidentally had the wrong author name. The original author reached out and I immediately corrected but I felt awful. I can’t imagine having the moral depravity to rip off your work and also push it so aggressively (makes sense now), whilst thinking no one would ever catch on.
SkyFeistyLlama8@reddit
There have been people ripping off open source work since the first days of open source. FLOSS actually, as in free and libre.
These asshats think nothing will happen to them if they use others' work without credit. Time to prove them wrong. If they wanted to get rich by stealing code and giving it a new paint job, they deserve whatever lawsuits and ostracization come their way.
tomByrer@reddit
I've heard that abliteration also has side effect of the model being improved at other things, eg coding. So abliteration could improve performance, reducing time, $ & energy costs.
I hope you continue your research with this in mind.
Ell2509@reddit
Hey! I just wanted to say thank you for all the work you do.
Having refusals removed is the only way I can get models to understand and fill the roles I have for them, and I have downloaded SO many of yours.
Thank you.
Regarding your plagiarism problem, just remember: copying is a great form of flattery.
Evening_Ad6637@reddit
I really appreciate your work and mindset ♥️
ArtfulGenie69@reddit
For me I appreciate the work but this mindset of mine mine mine and that guy stole stuff thing, I don't like. The ip game played around free software especially is just eye rolling to me. Like I get it, you feel like someone copied you, so what.
Evening_Ad6637@reddit
What do you mean by "mine, mine, mine" - it's actually the exact opposite of what pew does. He invests time, brainpower and talent that I and many others dont have, and he just gives it to us at 0 $.
And there is nothing wrong with expecting at least a small gesture of appreciation. In fact, as I see it, expecting it is a good sign of healthy self-respect. The work pew does is cost-free for us, but it's not worthless. So your moral part as an consumer is to show the author that you understand the value behind the work. Or let say, to not hide it.
We're human after all and our social dynamics as a species are based on give and take. Even if you can give or take only a little, the main thing is that you do it. HauHau would have only had to give a tiny bit, just a mention, but he didn’t and instead he actively tried to fool the community..
JonMcElyea@reddit
Thanks for your work. The community is forever grateful.
BillDStrong@reddit
IANAL, but the AGPL does not protect against the output of your software, and the models he releases are such output.
Do I think its crappy to not credit you? Yes. Did he break the law? No. If you want to protect the output, you have to choose a better license.
Thank you for your work, btw.
dqUu3QlS@reddit
Read more carefully. The models aren't the problem, the training code is.
BillDStrong@reddit
The training code isn't. He is allowed to use the code on his own systems for his personal use to create an output. The AGPL protects from running the code as a service on a network to others without giving them access to the source code and changes.
The reaper-abliteration has been taken down, and is thus in compliance with the AGPL. Now, that stint while it was available it wasn't, but it has been corrected, so he is in compliance. He isn't doing this, he is using it personally, then providing models.
tomByrer@reddit
Small chance it was unconscious by the human, but conscious by the coding model used / auto-agent.
I've had AIs copy/paste code many times that I know were not original. Often (mostly with front-end dev) the Ai keeps the same file/folder names & structure as established projects when I ask to to make a new repo from 'scratch'. Google is the worst at this, even when I ask it to edit my own files it will drop all the copywrite notices I put in comments.
That said, I agree there are too many similarities with your code, & should have given credit, esp after being approached.
-p-e-w-@reddit
This isn't (only) about structure. There are dozens of identifiers with identical names, and almost all core logic is identical. That doesn't happen if you just give an LLM instructions to write some program. But it absolutely does happen if you clone an existing project and then tell an LLM to "paraphrase" it so it won't look identical.
Not that it matters. People who use AIs to write code, and then publish that code, are morally and legally responsible for that code. AI is a tool. "The machine did it!" is not an excuse.
And of course the author is well aware of Heretic. I have directly engaged with them on at least a dozen occasions and Heretic is constantly mentioned in the comment sections of their posts.
tomByrer@reddit
Me, in the comment you're replying to.
Ah, thanks for the insight.
Well, this echoes how much sampling was used in the 1990s, where folks would rip off entire riffs without credit. Shut Up & Dance got sued over this song.
-p-e-w- is 100% correct to be upset, but sad reality is we humans now exist to feed the AI machines.
Durian881@reddit
Humans are still responsible when they use AI though.
tomByrer@reddit
While I agree with you, how many double-check where every segment of their AI-created code did not come another repo? Shoot, humans barely read every line of code from human-hand-coded PRs, let alone from volumes that AI spits out working 24 hours/day.
Fit-Produce420@reddit
Hey thanks for your work, HauhauCS models are not very good, I'm unsurprised by this development.
Much-Researcher6135@reddit
We all know who the real heretic is.
muyuu@reddit
I'm with you, but I don't know if you can really prevent this situation, other than making it public online as you're doing here.
Perhaps you're familiar with this? https://github.com/chardet/chardet/issues/327
alex20_202020@reddit
Pardon me for asking a bit off topic, I am new to abliteration but want to learn more. I have opened your code and it uses subset of training data for evaluation. (https://github.com/p-e-w/heretic/blob/master/config.default.toml)
In general for models training AFAIK evaluation set should not be included in training data. Maybe for abliteration the logic is different, why? TIA
-p-e-w-@reddit
No, Heretic doesn't use training data for evaluation. The datasets are strictly separate in the config, drawing from the
trainandtestsplits, respectively.alex20_202020@reddit
Ah, thank you, I did not know toml and datasets format well.
FranticBronchitis@reddit
Thank you and keep on being excellent
Guilty_Rooster_6708@reddit
I always prefer heretic model over Hauhau, not over anything serious but I have followed you since your first heretic post on this sub and really like your method. Going to exclusive it yours over Hauhau’s models from now on as well. Keep up the good work!!
draconic_tongue@reddit
"the highly unusual geometric median approach for reorientation" this doesn't really mean anything, it's not a novel approach and geomedian comes up frequently when working with neural networks. very common in model merging for example
-p-e-w-@reddit
This isn't about neural networks, it's about rotating a 2D scatter plot. If you look at scatter plot code from other projects, you will find that the overwhelming majority of them don't rotate the plot at all, and those that do overwhelmingly use simply means, not geometric medians. This is super specific code for a super specific use case, and I'm not even sure it's a good idea. The fact that it nevertheless shows up in that project after Heretic used it speaks volumes.
4baobao@reddit
if you're talking about morality, do you think it's morally right to use an agpl license for a tool that modifies MIT licensed models?
-p-e-w-@reddit
Huh?
4baobao@reddit
I think my question was pretty clear?
Marksta@reddit
Do you think an AGPL licensed notepad program makes all files it opens and saves into AGPL licensed text files?
4baobao@reddit
do you think people would like ai models being agpl licensed?
Internal_Werewolf_48@reddit
Its not really. What moral discrepancy exists by choosing a different license that you're questioning?
StableLlama@reddit
Is it right to use the OSS gcc C++ compiler to compile commercial, close source code?
Is it right to use the commercial Microsoft C++ compiler to compile free open source code?
No, the tool licence doesn't relate to the data licence it is working with.
4baobao@reddit
this has nothing to do with open source, the guy knows very well why he chose AGPL and it's not because he wanted people to credit his work
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
When I had researched the AGPL license, the models licenses themselves are not affected by the input or output of an AGPL tool.
So the abliterated model technically retains the same license as the original model in this case.
-p-e-w-@reddit
Yes, of course. The license covers the code, not what you produce with it. Just like with other software.
For the record, I care much more about the moral side of this than about the legal side. I'm not making any money with Heretic, but it just sucks to have someone spit in my face like this.
4baobao@reddit
If the models this tool is designed for were released with the same type license, people would cry about it everywhere. It's just a shitty thing to do and claiming moral superiority is weird. Just make it closed source st this point.
Needausernameplzz@reddit
thank you for all your work and for the license
ACheshirov@reddit
Ok, I was wondering which one is better. These Uncensored Aggressive (which I'm currently using) or the Heretic ones.
So, it turns out that no matters anymore ;D
AI_Enhancer@reddit
It does matter https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/s/OcHGQ0WtkV
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
The honest answer is, it really depends on who made the heretic variant and how it was made. I've had heretic models that seem to refuse nothing, and others that refuse more than usual.
I did benchmarking for Qwen 3 and 3.5 models, and recently GLM 4.7 Flash comparing heretic, huihui, hauhaucs and abliterlix models to answer this very question.
The tl;dr is heretic had came out on top. Hauhaucs, especially as the model size grew, lost quality and certainly was not lossless.
Yu2sama@reddit
You did for the abliterlix? Where could I see that?
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
I'll post that one tomorrow here :)
ACheshirov@reddit
Idk, i'm fine with the Uncensored Aggressive i'm currently using. It never refuses and the model seems quite "intelligent" to me (I don't notice any loss in quality compared with the original one).
ChrisInEdmonton@reddit
Presumably this matters only to the tooling (if distributed), not to the models generated using the tools? Or am I mistaken?
By no longer distributing the toolset, is the license violation resolved?
I know I can use a GPL’ed compiler to compile my own source code, without the resulting executable being subject to the GPL. This, though, is a different license. I’m hoping people can correct me if I’m wrong.
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
There's evidence to suggest the tooling was, for a brief time, distributed then removed.
The abliterated models themselves are not affected by the licensing of this, as they should retain the same license as the base models. So the AGPL tool does not affect the input or output model license.
I am unsure of the lisence that hauhaucs had applied however, and how that affects models. So I am assuming it's the same case.
I'm sure people enjoy to use the models, that's fine. Regardless of if the tool is not distributed, it doesn't change the fact it was plagiarized and doesn't really resolve the license violation.
finevelyn@reddit
Isn't it the case that the only remaining license violation is the deleted, but still cached packages on pypi?
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
And also the copy that sits on his system. Along with the ones downloaded today. Or any copies anywhere really.
finevelyn@reddit
It's only the distribution of such software that is a copyright violation.
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
Copyright and licensing can be considered separate things and setting aside those, if it was completely private and not distributed it just means it was plagiarized in private. It doesn't change the fact that it was plagiarized.
finevelyn@reddit
People do such things with open source software all the time in private and it's completely legal and fair play. I used license violation and copyright violation interchangeably because they are the exact same thing in this context.
Downloading a piece of software or any other creative piece of work from the internet for your own purposes, and using it, modifying it, doing whatever you want with it (with the exception below) is a basic legal right. It cannot be made illegal by a license even if the license was written by the copyright owner.
The only exception is distributing that piece of work (or showing it to the public) which is illegal by default. You are only allowed to do distribute it if you have a permission from the copyright owner, and the license is what gives you that permission under certain conditions. If you distribute it while not abiding by those conditions then the only thing you can be demanded to do is to stop distributing it, and pay for damages for any illegal distribution that already happened. The license terms cannot be used to mandate you to do anything else.
Mind you, I'm not familiar with every law of every country, but the same principle applies pretty much universally that any exceptions to what you are allowed to do must come from the law, and not from a license.
TLDR: A copyright license gives you rights you otherwise wouldn't have, it doesn't take away your rights. You can just completely ignore the license if you don't want those rights, and it's not a violation of anything.
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
Sure, I mean with all respect and I enjoy looking at both sides, however we'll have to agree to disagree on this topic. Even if you want to just focus on copyright law and not the license, at least in US law if a copyright attribution is removed that's still illegal regardless of it's distributed. I can't find any evidence to suggest otherwise.
I'm unsure about other countries. I did read into this a bit this morning and had come to this conclusion myself. Of course you're welcome to your own interpretation we may disagree on.
And in this case, the application was distributed for a small time. The PyPi repo itself had hundreds of downloads per month. So I think it's fair to say it was distributed and by your own standard, the distribution alone makes it a violation. While removed at a later date, there is evidence it was indeed distributed.
finevelyn@reddit
Could you please tell me what you expect to happen to resolve the violation? He adds attribution to his private source files he never shows to anyone and then it's ok? Do we send the police to check his computers?
I'm 100% serious about this question. Would you think this is a good interpretation of the law?
Yes, if true, it was. That was the whole point of all my comments that the pypi distribution is the only violation I saw in this whole picture, and it has now been resolved except for the caches. The only further course of action would be to demand for compensation for the copies already made through there, but it's not anymore an ongoing violation by the uploader.
a_beautiful_rhind@reddit
I mean who cares. He's still a fake and a grifter.
Ok-Measurement-1575@reddit
oof, drama
mrdevlar@reddit
Please don't let this turn into a drama subreddit, I'm not here for this.
gittubaba@reddit
Kinda off topic, but since you did the analysis, what is the difference between the HauhauCS's Balanced vs Aggressive versions? Is that also a Heretic feature?
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
I'm unsure the difference. I did run benchmarks with the aggressive ones comparing to other abliterated models but never reviewed the balanced one.
I assume maybe it is just different techniques used, or maybe different results chosen from the tool being ran. His tool being based on heretic means no two runs are the same and will produce different results. Maybe one result seemed more balance and one more aggressive.
As it stands it's not really a heretic feature also.
Confident-Willow5457@reddit
I always thought they were on the sus side ever since they started making claims that their models were fully abliterated without any quality loss, then aggressively pushed back/ignored users when they asked them for proof of said claims.
FishChillylly@reddit
it’s typically CCP’s sophisticated propaganda with outright fascist execution tactics.
idkwhattochoo@reddit
I wonder why we are pulling CCP here
No_Swimming6548@reddit
You mispronounced Donal Trump
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
Yup. I had ran benchmarks that disprove the lossless claims completely, https://old.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1sojjoc/abliterlitics_benchmark_and_tensor_analysis/ and then was blocked. :)
FriskyFennecFox@reddit
Not respecting a license is absolutely a bad habit and it's good it's being called on, but on the other hand, AGPL is not a good pick for such software.
If we're digging into AGPL clauses, every weight that went through Heretic's abliteration can, after a lawyer's touch, become "infected" by it and must only be shared under an AGPL-compatible license as well (which is, well, AGPL). It's as bad as LLaMA-like licenses, as both introduce massive legal complications to the weights, just from different angles.
Not a fan of the situation and not a fan of AGPL carrying over it's infamous copyleft nature into LLMs.
idkwhattochoo@reddit
c'mon mate, it's not that hard to read AGPL, is it?
Colecoman1982@reddit
Don't like the terms of the license? Then don't use the model. It's as simple as that. So sorry to hear that the license Heretic has chosen to use for the LLM (that they spent time and effort creating) might actually require you to not be a totally self serving leech and contribute back to the community... /s
FriskyFennecFox@reddit
Gosh, let Heretic keep their AGPL, no beef with that! Yes, far-copyleft, but it does the job done when you want to keep something source-available for all the tinkerers and researchers out there. But it doesn't play well with LLMs!
We have CC-BY around, a near-perfect license for LLM weights that require the necessary attribution that respects the work of the others.
Keep Heretic AGPL to prevent it from being used in non-FOSS software, add an additional clarification clause that either binds the output (the weights) to be a mix of the the original license and the CC-BY-alike, or simply retain the original license.
Perfect solution, respects both parties, no /s required! Reddit and its critical assumptions "Did that Redditor just said a word against AGPL? What an absolute leecher, I'm sure they're one of those people who steal someone's code and earn millions of profit without giving back, cancel 'em immediately!"
Ulterior-Motive_@reddit
I wish that's how it worked, everything should be AGPL.
FriskyFennecFox@reddit
The world if everything was under AGPL, according to Reddit,
jwpbe@reddit
the AGPL is based, get infected idiot, software was meant to be free
FriskyFennecFox@reddit
Richard Stallman spotted !
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
Actually this is misleading. It's already been stated previously that AGPL software does not change or alter the licensing of the models going in or out of it. An abliterated model retains the same model as what it was based on, and is never changed because of AGPL. It's easy to verify by reading the AGPL license.
CelvestianNesy@reddit
https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1sstq1w/comment/ohplh9g/
Well, if you look at this post, I called him out on this kinda(post with 40+ upvotes), but I was consequently blocked by the person, since I saw: "deleted" everywhere and shit, never use Reddit a lot, but this is my suspicioun.
This tells you EVERYTHING you need to know about that induvidual.
Stay cautious.
Stay smart!
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
Yup. Myself also blocked for publishing benchmarks that debunk his lossless claims. Also sharing my initial findings in the heretic discord, I was banned from his discord despite not saying anything.
His block and ban list must be massive lol, and I think after this information is shared more it's going to grow even more.
No-Anchovies@reddit
u/nathandreamfast cant block google with a good 'ol dork/.json append. Thanks for taking out the trash
rakarsky@reddit
Somewhat amusingly, his blocking you means this post is invisible to him until someone sends him a direct link. And he'll have to unblock you to be able to reply.
FaceDeer@reddit
Unfortunately Reddit's user-block feature is pretty badly designed, it lets a person very easily shape the discourse by preemptively banning everyone on a subreddit that might disagree with what you're about to post. They never even see your post in the first place, leaving its comments populated entirely by people inclined to agree.
thread-e-printing@reddit
It also suppresses the blockee's ability to reply to replies to comments they've made. I think it's designed that way for the convenience of professional discourse managers.
FaceDeer@reddit
Yeah, it leads to rather annoying situations where a blocker can come in and completely disrupt my ability to converse with an unrelated third party. Just another terribly designed aspect of it.
MerePotato@reddit
Always thought that claim was sus as there's no such thing as abliteration without quality loss, the whole thing works by suppressing some of the models self evaluation functionality
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
Yes and recent benchmarks I've done prove that there is indeed some quality lost, mostly with TruthfulQA.
__JockY__@reddit
Same thing. Seems like a very common occurrence!
CelvestianNesy@reddit
Kinda glad people are exposing bro left and right. xDD
satyaloka93@reddit
So the 'Ollama' of abliteration?
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
lol had a laugh at that one, thanks!
Independent-Date393@reddit
the source comment that reads 'kept as a module-level tuple so the literal does not duplicate line-for-line with any fork' is the tell. an LLM asked to obscure a fork would document its own evasion strategy. a human hiding a fork would not write that.
Sexiest_Man_Alive@reddit
Who from huggingface should I download heretic models from? Too many people posting their heretic version of the qwen3.5 27b model. This why I usually just go straight to huahua to download any abliterated models.
rakarsky@reddit
Make your own heretic model. It's very easy to use an you get to choose your own accuracy / refusal balance, and experiment with the different options before you commit to one in particular.
Sexiest_Man_Alive@reddit
That there is way too much work for me and most people here.
rakarsky@reddit
If the details are so unimportant then you can just download the first abliteration you see listed on hf.
Dexamph@reddit
Llmfan46’s 27b models seem to work well enough to not buckle under long context
Top-Rub-4670@reddit
That's the issue, isn't it? I know this is a thread for hating on hauhaucs but I've had way less issues with his Qwen 3.5 models than with random heretics.
I've tried a dozen, at least, because I was told that heretic was "better" and "the future" so I kept trying to replace hauhaucs' models to future-proof myself. It's easy to test the KLD but the real issues with abliterated models tend to surface mainly in longer context, so it takes hours of real testing before you realize it's broken and you need to try another one.
Long_comment_san@reddit
You shouldn't have made the issue public before having a proper conversation with the author.
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
All of my attempts to contact hauhaucs have resulted in no response and I've been blocked on Reddit and banned from his discord.
Long_comment_san@reddit
so you tried contacting him and prompting about the whole thing? you didn't mention that in the post which is very important (unless I missed it).
Why are you blocked? Did you provoke this by some action? Just asking couldn't have gotten you blocked, could it? I would have mentioned that if that was the case.
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
I was blocked on reddit and banned from his discord because I made public benchmarks disproving the lossless claim of his models, the post is here https://old.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1sojjoc/abliterlitics_benchmark_and_tensor_analysis/
And it seems a common pattern to be blocked or banned by hauhaucs for 'just asking' about proof of his claims or technical discussion with his methods.
crossivejoker@reddit
Yea he does this to everyone. I got him to reply to me before with his "reasoning". It was super ego filled, missed the point, dodged anything with substance and mostly boiled down to, "everyone fights over KLD metrics. Which is dumb and it's not perfect. Even though I use it because it's kinda the best we have." And kinda just tried to sound philosophical in a way to dance around the question.
Mind you I only got that response because I purposely left a very very nice comment to try and get him to respond. He even remotely smells skepticism, he'll not respond. And even when you are nice, he'll just ignore you if you ask a legit question.
u/Long_comment_san he legit does this to everyone. He's a jerk.
Long_comment_san@reddit
Wow lol. Wild
Lissanro@reddit
OP already replied why he was blocked here: https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1sw77p0/comment/oidleoq/ - and he wasn't alone either. It is safe to say that the person who blocks others for finding issues or incorrect statements, is not open to a constructive dialog.
Long_comment_san@reddit
I see. Yeah, this is not looking good for him
LetsGoBrandon4256@reddit
Oh boy.
gurilagarden@reddit
Great...that's a least a few hundred gb i gotta re-download now.
computehungry@reddit
To strengthen your post, you might want to delete the last part about quants because 1) they might be using a different quantizer; 2) it's not wrong to call it "custom", that's what everyone is doing to produce llama.cpp compatible quants, M, L, XL, XS, XXS, whatever, those are all made up and some got standardized enough; and 3) it's pretty unrelated.
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
Thanks for your feedback. I did decide to include this as the quants were framed as a unique approach, reading about them it gives the impression it's more than the standard llama.cpp tools.
More than a few people had asked about it and got zero reply form hauhaucs or were blocked. The 'P' type also is not a llama.cpp standard, and I doubt it ever will be.
So for those curious about these quants, it's a note there was no evidence in the code that it was anything special and it's standard llama.cpp imatrix + better precision in certain layers rebranded as 'Perfect'.
Insight to the methodology from what I had found about these quants and reviewing the source was more the point of mentioning it.
computehungry@reddit
That's fine, I'm just pointing out it doesn't have anything to do with heretic or its license (which is what your post is about), so it becomes more out of scope and a personal attack. You don't have to drop low and also weaken your argument.
I'd also differentiate between llama.cpp and huggingface; none of unsloth's quants are a llama.cpp standard too - at least on the outside. Whatever label it may have, UD, XL: they are actually passed to llama.cpp as normal K quants (general.file_type). Same with P quants from HauhauCS, I see his file_types are Q6_K for example. His issue is that huggingface doesn't recognize it properly. Which is kinda also on huggingface, it doesn't show a bunch of popular quants from popular makers too, for whatever metadata reason (or the uploaders may not have had them tagged the right way). The usual magic is how to pick the parameters within the llama.cpp framework, if it isn't standard it won't work in the first place.
UntimelyAlchemist@reddit
I could be missing something, but I don't see what the problem is supposed to be or why I should be mad. Based on how I understand your post:
You don't know for sure that this is even his tool. The linked page says an assumption is being made based on the "Reaper" term.
Even if it is his tool, it's private. He didn't release it to the public. You "recovered" it from a cached copy of a deleted repository. So what's the problem?
Heretic is free software. Doesn't this mean he's allowed to use it? I thought most people already assumed he was probably using Heretic and then applying some secret sauce to it to get such amazing results. I'm not sure why you're saying he's "plagiarising" it, as if he's doing something damning.
This just seems like a hit piece to me.
computehungry@reddit
A hivemind moral police that lacks critical thinking. Probably copied. If it was distributed then it's a problem, but the post doesn't focus on this aspect. Licenses are half dead in the first place when you can ask an LLM to write something similar for you. Plenty of people legally making money with similar claimed future business model. The discussion has to be better than this.
zerofata@reddit
People took issue with his claims of lossless uncensored models. But they had difficulty proving this because he only ever released his models in GGUF which is an awful format to benchmark or test against. Concurrency in LlamaCPP sucks, quantization is inherently noisy and there are slight differences in every inference engine that make them difficult to compare.
Anytime you ask him for evidence to prove his grand claims or release safetensors, you got blocked or ignored.
So, the poster reversed the GGUF model back into safetensors format and benchmarked them against other abliteration methods. They scored similar, better in some cases, worse in others, with notable similarities to heretic. Ok, that's suspicious at best and the lossless claim debunked.
His fork was posted Github (at some point) and PyPI (evidenced by caches of it existing). The fork that is a clear derivative of Heretic. The fork that has none of the license requirements required by Heretic. The fork maintained by HauHauCS who only recently became known for abliterations in the last few months since Heretic released.
https://packages.ecosyste.ms/registries/pypi.org/packages/reaper-abliteration/maintainers
Common sense indicates if you're using a fork just say you're using it instead of pretending you have some magic method. Because then you look like an idiot when someone actually finds out.
crossivejoker@reddit
P-e-w is a good repo maintainer as well. He's quick to respond and keeps a close eye on what's uploaded. I submitted a PR that got merged in the other day. It broke stuff (I'm so sorry!) but the broke stuff got fixed, and I'm glad the original PR was able to contribute as well (outside of bugs lol).
Also to give p-e-w credit too, I've shared findings with him. He took the time to read it, digest it, and go, "hey this is actually pretty wrong, here's the evidence". Not in a mean way or anything, just empirically. I appreciate that kind of mentality.
It's so weird that HauhauCS didn't just credit heretic. Even weirder he was so secretive tbh. Pretty sure if he was like, "yea I use a modified fork of heretic", gave credit, and didn't lie about benchmarks. He would have been not just more respected, but it would have avoided so much drama.
It's weird to me when people attach ego to code in general. I have my own forked versions of heretic trying to attempt some really weird things. Never posted the models or the code because it was terrible lol. Often 3X more damage, but it was fun to try. Still trying mind you too with some cool ideas, but like.. It's not a big deal to fork, give real numbers, and just be honest O_o
fiery_prometheus@reddit
Fuck that dude, his quants are dead to me..
I hope you know that many of us greatly appreciate your work and community engagement, we need more people like you, and less people like him. I just hope you won't let that bastard kill your motivation.
-p-e-w-@reddit
While such things do take a toll on me, I intend to push forward with Heretic for as long as I am able to, and we have a very exciting release coming up soon!
montdawgg@reddit
Never stop. In fact, anything that aims to slow you down, you should invert it and turn it into fuel to make you go even harder.
These obliterations and uncensored models seem very niche right now. However, in years to come future iterations could very well be instrumental in preserving freedom, democracy, and autonomy. The work being done here is exceptionally important. Quite frankly, more important than any individual person, including you, me, or any one plagiarizer. Thank you for your contributions and continued work.
fiery_prometheus@reddit
That's understandable and quite human, but I hope the community will help correct the wrongdoings and that you get the attribution you rightfully deserve. Looking forward to the new release! :-)
llama-impersonator@reddit
you've put a bunch of effort into proving this guy looks like a grifter, thanks from another member of the blocked for asking a neutral question brigade.
WithoutReason1729@reddit
Your post is getting popular and we just featured it on our Discord! Come check it out!
You've also been given a special flair for your contribution. We appreciate your post!
I am a bot and this action was performed automatically.
Dominiclul@reddit
That is really fucked up. I’m just glad the community figured it out in the end ❤️
RottenPingu1@reddit
Well.... go ess I'm deleting that model I literally just downloaded.
PANIC_EXCEPTION@reddit
Mods should consider a permanent ban off this subreddit and contact other similar subs. Sounds like someone who needs to be blacklisted
Velocita84@reddit
Color me surprised. HauhauCS is a fraud and a grifter. When is he getting banned from the subreddit?
34574rd@reddit
ive never trusted his models either ways
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
When I was comparing weights of the Qwen3-4B-2507-Instruct-Uncensored-HauhauCS to p-e-w's heretic version, the same tensors heretic touched matched with over 97% vs hauhaucs. I had a gut feeling that the models were more or less based on heretic in some way. I mention this in the github pages about this specific model.
And certainly the closed nature and blocking/banning anyone who inquires too much (including me!) doesn't help build trust at all. I'm sure he'll still have his fans, but at the least there's now benchmarking to debunk the lossless/zero refusal claims, and solid evidence the tool he used was actually plagiarized from Heretic.
draconic_tongue@reddit
that type of comparison is not very reliable as proof, unless you expect these tools to alter huge amounts of each layer (which would break the model) they will always be 90%+ as long as 2 models are based on the same parent. tuning a few million neurons is not enough to remove relationships when the params are counted in billions. and actually, even if you do a full finetune, you would still be hard pressed to go lower than that.
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
I had compared to other heretic models and also made 4 of my own and no, they were not always 90%+
I also had done an extensive tensor analysis comparing with the base exactly what tensors and layers were altered. You can read about it here https://huggingface.co/DreamFast/Qwen3-4B-2507-Instruct-Uncensored-HauhauCS-Aggressive-Safetensor-Benchmark
And also I never mentioned this was 'proof', it just gave me a gut feeling that there was more to it and looking into it further was the result of this post.
Vicar_of_Wibbly@reddit
I’ll throw my hat in to say I’m another person he blocked for raising questions and asking for benchmarks. No response, just blocked.
Zestyclose_Yak_3174@reddit
I think we should reserve judgements until he can comment himself. I understand the license was not followed but he might not be aware of it. It also seems his code made a lot of smaller improvements and changes so it's not like he is using the exact same code. Did he do it for monetary gain like some of you here imply? Could be; however he never did something like that before. I have no stake in all of it, yet I recognize that he did interesting work and seems to have a unique approach. We need different perspectives and angles and I hope he could come to some type of rectification and/or mutual understanding with PEW. So many interesting and cutting out projects have died due to similar issues. It's a well known thing in the open source world.
Ell2509@reddit
I hate to be an asshole, but you have proven similarity, not intentional plagiarism.
We can all clearly see what you are showing. But there still remains the possibility of "innocence", so to speak.
I do not know how you would go about proving that. But it will not be easy.
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
I disagree with this.
There is no real chance if hauhaucs had wrote his own app from scratch, it'd end up this similar and matching the unique approaches heretic had also taken for certain solutions.
There are a lot of similarities however it's more than that. The code comparisons chosen are what is unique and novel to heretic. These parts were blatantly copied and there is a nil chance that another developer, by accident, could reproduce the same solution to problems so many times, using the exact same function names and arguments with some slightly changed variable names.
Of course it's up to the reader to decide.
Myself being a software developer it's obvious this was just a fork which then had an LLM extensively refactored it to mask (poorly) the origins.
CheatCodesOfLife@reddit
It does look like a "fork" overall skimming that analysis. But I disagree with this part:
Simply because I have those exact same things in my ik_llama.cpp banned_strings.txt among others. When testing it out / iterating, it becomes obvious to do this.
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
Thank you for your feedback. I am certainly open to any suggestions such as this and to make any updates.
When I was comparing this, it stood out to me as it had the original heretic list contents. And given how many other aspects of the application were seemingly copied, that's what led me to the assumption that this list was also copied and built upon.
CheatCodesOfLife@reddit
Agreed. No I don't really have any suggestions, it's a good write up.
-p-e-w-@reddit
I do agree with that to some extent. I derived that list from repeatedly iterating with models like Gemma 3, and if you see the patterns and damage artifacts then some of those markers become logical to use.
That being said, somehow having all except one of the same markers, as well as dozens of identical identifier names and hundreds of close paraphrases in the rest of the code (including for highly unusual logic), is an entirely different beast. There can be no reasonable doubt overall regarding what happened here.
CheatCodesOfLife@reddit
Yeah given the rest of the code-base is copied, no doubt he grabbed these from heretic. btw, another one for some of the newer models is: "i appreciate you" (eg. I appreciate you sharing this with me,).
Ell2509@reddit
I just studied law for a few years. I'm not a lawyer. But that is the nature of the challenge.
Lissanro@reddit
In this case it is easy, because plagiarism is obvious and intentional. Stripping the original authorship is not something that can happen by accident. Multiple filenames, variable names, even types in some test prompts, are identical as well - pretty much impossible to happen any other way but plagiarism.
What makes this absurd, there is simply no reason to plagiarize - just fork properly, preferably sharing findings and improved methods with the community.
Thanks to the OP bringing this to light.
BitPsychological2767@reddit
Why would you need proof when you have entitlement?
birotester@reddit
so should we stop using his models?
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
If you're happy using the models that's totally fine, many people enjoy using them. This post was more to bring to light the tools used to make those models were plagiarized.
Ell2509@reddit
So legality aside for a minute (I was only trying to help) it seems pretty certain that you are sure.
Are you the original creator? Or a friend or colleague? Either way I would want heretic people to hear me say thank you personally. I am doing a lot with what they give and I personally plan to give credit when the time comes.
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
The creator of heretic p-e-w has already commented in this thread, his comment has the most upvotes. You can thank him there!
__JockY__@reddit
HauhauCS was an abusive a$$hole to me on more than one occasion, and all I ever did was ask for him to publish evidence of his claims.
He/she/they just block commenters immediately unless you they something nice. It comes as no surprise that they plagiarized a bunch of the work claimed as their own.
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
Yup, sorry to hear that. If it helps here is some evidence completely disproving his claims, at least for Qwen 3.5 https://old.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1sojjoc/abliterlitics_benchmark_and_tensor_analysis/ and yes it got me blocked lol although he never has directly communicated with me.
I think it's more cultivating his own hug box echo chamber. If he does ban anyone who questions him on reddit or discord, they are not able to comment on any of his future posts.
BitPsychological2767@reddit
Why are the mods deleting any comments that are trying to discuss licensing itself?
Pwc9Z@reddit
Does that mean it now became immoral to be running his Superaggressive-Turborapist finetunes? Damn.
StableLlama@reddit
Why? Tool != data.
But when he's dishonest about the tool, how can you trust his data?
cptbeard@reddit
it's sarcasm. immoral gooners wouldn't care about developer ethics violation.
FaceDeer@reddit
Yeah, I've got an Aggressive model I've been using and I think I'll be replacing it with a different uncensored one now simply because I can't trust what I read about its quality.
Xamanthas@reddit
No clue if you are trying to be sarcastic or not but all this post confirms is what anyone in the know already knew, that Hauhau is a fraud.
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
I'm sure many people, including myself, had a suspicion. Just the closed nature, gguf only, no benchmarks or actual evidence of the claims. All red flags.
Still despite all this I'm sure he'll have his fans, maybe some people wont care and use the models anyway which is fine. The more important thing is there's now solid evidence his claims about his models are bogus, and the tool he has used his not really what he made it out to be.
Pwc9Z@reddit
Yes, well done
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
Wont be catching me running inference on anything aggressive :)
pigeon57434@reddit
im really not sure why we ever talked about this guy in the first place his uncensored models seem to be worse than heretic while being less transparent about the method heretic is really the only SoTA uncensoring method in 2026
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
Well he does seem to have a lot of fans, 5+ million downloads a month is a lot so it's hard to not notice or talk about for some people.
Benchmarks I had ran myself prove his models are worse than heretic, and this also proves his methodology was based on plagiarized software. So maybe after this dies down we wont have to speak of the 'hauhaucs guy' again. :)
pigeon57434@reddit
we probably shouldnt speak of any uncensoring methods or people other than heretic since heretic is open source anyone who actually cares about improving the space and not chasing reddit fame would just contribute their methods to heretic and get added to it soon anyways
Firm-Fix-5946@reddit
who?
tim_dude@reddit
He didn't plagiarize, he forked it /s
AvidCyclist250@reddit
Big fuckery. Heretic is the Goat anyway.
a_beautiful_rhind@reddit
That's pretty pathetic. If you do shit like this it will eventually be found out. Then you get outed as a huge phony and there goes your reputation.
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
Yeah given how easy it was to uncover this, it makes me wonder what his end game was with all of this. Maybe get a following and a fan base, then monetize? I don't know.
a_beautiful_rhind@reddit
There's a ton of uninformed people he can recruit for a following. And yes, eventually take donations, all that jazz.
Paradigmind@reddit
Somehow we all knew that it stank to hell that HauHau claimed to have found the holy grail with absolutely no degradation and an ominous 0/465 refusals out-of-his-ass benchmark.
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
My favourite part of all of this, besides the comment in config.py is:
Benchmark platform vs. own model benchmarks
HauhauCS built APEX Testing, a benchmark platform for evaluating coding LLMs on real codebases. His announcement post and his follow-up “Qwen 3.5 craters on hard coding tasks” with 561 upvotes both call for rigorous benchmarking of other people’s models. He has never published benchmarks for any of his own models. Every model card contains zero benchmark numbers, only the “0/465 refusals” claim. The benchmark results linked in this document are ones we produced independently.
denoflore_ai_guy@reddit
Nawwww you don’t say
4baobao@reddit
anyone using AGPL can go fuck themselves, props to hauhau for ignoring it
Aromatic-Flatworm-57@reddit
Why?
4baobao@reddit
because AGPL is just as far from open source as closed source is
-p-e-w-@reddit
The Free Software Foundation, the world's #1 authority on Open Source, which has been doing this since before you were born, disagrees with you.
pitbox46@reddit
bait used to be believable
nathandreamfast@reddit (OP)
The license that hauhau had chosen for his plagiarized version is actually more restrictive than AGPL. Nothing wrong with some attribution if you're using someone elses honest work.
pitbox46@reddit
Based on what I've heard about hauhau, this isn't surprising
BitPsychological2767@reddit
Genuinely who cares?