Tommaso Gagliardoni<p>I am confused by the new Open Source AI definition not requiring sharing the training data.</p><p>From the official FAQ of the OSI: "This approach would relegate Open Source AI to a niche of AI trainable only on open data [...] That niche would be tiny [...]"</p><p>I fail to see the problem here. Wasn't FOSS a small niche before GNU picked up steam?</p><p>(Also, if I'm not mistaken, the word should be "trained", not "trainable". A tiny but important difference)</p><p>Can someone enlighten me on how this is a sensible idea please? I am open to different opinions on the matter.</p><p><a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/AI" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>AI</span></a> <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/FOSS" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>FOSS</span></a> <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/OSAI" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>OSAI</span></a> <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/opensource" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>opensource</span></a> <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/GNU" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>GNU</span></a> <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/OSI" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>OSI</span></a></p>