cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/21873892
The Open Source Initiative (OSI) released the RC1 (“Release Candidate 1” meaning: This thing is basically done and will be released as such unless something catastrophic happens) of the “Open Source AI Definition“.
Some people might wonder why that matters. Some people come up with a bit of writing on AI, what else is new? That’s basically LinkedIn’s whole existence currently. But the OSI has a very special role in the Open Source software ecosystem. Because Open Source isn’t just based on the fact whether you can see code but also about the License that code is covered under: You might get code that you can see but that you are not allowed to touch (think of the recent WinAmp release debate). The OSI basically took on the role of defining which of the different licenses that were being used all over the place actually are “Open Source” and which come with restrictions that undermine the idea.
This is very important: Picking a license is a political act with strong consequences. It can allow or forbid different modes of interaction with an object or might put certain requirements to the use.
You must log in or register to comment.
AI doesn’t even exist so I’ll go with … No
NOW ALWAYS CLOSED OPEN-BUT MINDED
AI putting in the work. Closed open-but minded fr.
“Open Source AI” is an attempt to “openwash” proprietary systems. In their paper “Rethinking open source generative AI: open-washing and the EU AI Act” Andreas Liesenfeld and Mark Dingemanse showed that many “Open Source” AI models offer hardly more than open model weights. Meaning: You can run the thing but you don’t actually know what it is.
Basically, no.
what we call ai is actually a web scraper with the ability to construct sentences
