Re: Concern for: A humble draft policy on "deep learning v.s. freedom"

[Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org>]

>>>>> "Osamu" == Osamu Aoki <osamu@debian.org> writes:

    Osamu> Hi, Let's think in a bit different perspective.

    Osamu> What is the outcome of "Deep Lerning".  That's "knowledge".

    Osamu> If the dictionary of "knowledge" is expressed in a freely
    Osamu> usable software format with free license, isn't it enough?

Unfortunately, I don't think this model applies well to deep learning.

That free knowledge in the dictionary isn't going to have hidden
potentially designed in security flaws.

For a Japanese input method, it might not matter.  If the wrong
character is chosen, I think the user can notice and correct it.

However, for other deep learning models, if the output decision is
wrong, the effect can be security sensitive.
And  without the training data it is very difficult to change the future
behavior of the program.
Or to even understand whether there are back doors.

In your dictionary example, if I have the resulting dictionary I can
modify it even if I don't understand how we got there.
That's not really true for deep learning models I cannot retrain.

--Sam