Re: Concerns regarding the "Open Source AI Definition" 1.0-RC2
Mo Zhou <lumin@debian.org> writes:
> My mind remains mostly the same from 6 years ago. And after 5~6 years,
> the most important concept in ML-Policy remains to be ToxicCandy,
> which is exactly AI released under open source license with their
> training data hidden.
Although I'm not involved with machine learning (aka "AI") in Debian, I
do feel pretty strongly that secret training data is wrong for software
in Debian main. So consider this a note of support.
While I agree with Stefano's later followup that GR's are not good tools
for building concensus, I'm not sure such policy decision is really in
the spirit of the FTP master delegation. I recognize that my skepticism
is influenced by the fact that I would consider following the proposed
"OSAID" model to be a substantial weakening of the DFSG.
Reply to: