@johnmark what do you expect when you ask for action? OSI has pushed out OSAID - which demands full transparency- but is still met with the almost impossible demand for only free data behind AI models. While Red Gat execs now call Llama 4 OSS which is obviously wrong. IMHO we must opposed open washing and embrace #osaid now
Interesting to see #OSI manufacture a problem about people reaching out to others, saying they should rather do this "on our forums where we provide community management and moderation support" https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/1014603/c791efdd5a4ca47c/
Last I checked (during the #OSAID snafu Sep/Oct 2024), the OSI forums were so tightly moderated that no sane and open discussion could take place anymore. The crackdown was very effective in letting reform-minded community members know their contributions weren't welcome
1/2
The #OSI 's one job is to protect and promote #OpenSource and the Open Source Definition (OSD). Undermining that definition with the weakened #OSAID has alienated much of the Open Source community, myself included.
I had hoped that might be turned around, but this year's reform candidates were likely the last chance to see that happen.
Watching the OSI promoting corporate sponsors was concerning, but this year's blatant election manipulation is the final straw.
They say to never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence.
Unfortunately this year's @osi board elections go way beyond that point.
The current Executive Director is leading #OSI in a direction the community don't want to follow with #OSAID. By changing the rules as you go along in this year's election to exclude candidates who want to reform the OSI you have destroyed any remaining trust.
You shat the bed. It's time to change the sheets.
Interesting. How does #OpenSource Initiative gain standing to bring a false advertising claim? Is there an article on #OSI's site that explains this enforcement mechanism & plan in detail? (And apologies I missed it until now!)
& is it on the #OSAID roadmap to bring false advertising claims against companies who have products they're calling "open source AI"?
If it is in the roadmap, I feel the community should have been told that during OSAID drafting.
Cc: @richardfontana
Interesting platform from @bkuhn & @richardfontana for the upcoming Open Source Initiative board election:
Repeal the Open Source AI Definition (OSAID)
Adopt a process for formal review of previously approved licenses
Remove “code of silence” from Board Member Agreement
Directors should be allowed to use FOSS for Board activities
This would have my vote. What about you?
In any case, WTF is a California-based organisation like @osi doing with a submarine GMT deadline? There's still absolutely no justification for this, except to censor the most important channel of all: elections.
Were I eligible to run I'd have left it to the last minute too, to incorporate all available information like the #FOSDEM revelation that they consider #OSAID 1.0 "too restrictive" and want more corporations for 2.0 which will water #OpenSource #AI down EVEN MORE.
In any process where you are talking about "stakeholders", if any of your stakeholders are not individual human beings, you need to think deeper.
A corporation is never a stakeholder.
The only reason to care about a corporation or other org is because of the real people that it might affect. The employees, perhaps. The customers, sometimes. *Those* are your stakeholders.
If one of your "stakeholders" is a trillion dollar corporation, you really are on the wrong path.
If you're "late to the game" regarding the #OSAID #OpenSource #AI definition from @osi and what is the criticism to it all about, this blog post from @sj, while specifically directed to @mozillaofficial, has a good enough amount of linkdump to be clarifying:
The absurdity continues:
#OSI management disqualifies reform-minded board candidate @lfaraone for not meeting an apparent candidacy deadline according to a time zone that was "conveniently" undocumented.
https://blog.luke.wf/2025/02/im-running-for-osi-board-maybe.html
@sj Thank you for sharing the article.
My stance, though, remains the same.
A program ("AI" included) is either free or not free.
This binary approach helped #freesoftware to keep it's meaning. #OSAID and, because of it #opensource now as well, are being exploited by big tech in order to deceive users and governments (who are willing to be fooled - like the EU), that their systems are transparent.
In my view, Open Weight Definition doesn't seem to hep this struggle for clarity.
@kirschner Two observations:
1)@osi should respond to Llama v3.1 as it is aggressively advertised as opensource by META. The, single author, blog post is for v2 and isn't even a statement...
2)The (1st) article was written 13 years ago - we must respond to what history taught us. opensource is now influenced by big tech in unprecedented ways. Advances in ML (and #OSAID) are widening the gap between #freesoftware and #opensource. I feel that using both terms is highly misleading fsf@hostux.social
Ο #osaid (σ.σ. ορισμός για την «ΤΝ ανοιχτού κώδικα») αντί να ζητάει όλα τα δεδομένα να είναι ανοιχτά - περιορίζεται στο να «καλύπτεται» με μια απλή περιγραφή τους.
Γιατί αυτό είναι τόσο σημαντικό; Γιατί αν δεν έχεις ΟΛΑ τα data του μοντέλου, δεν μπορείς να είσαι (καθόλου) σίγουρος/η για το πως αυτό λειτουργεί.
Στο #Fossdem την προηγούμενη εβδομάδα μάλωνα με «αξιωματούχους της Ε.Ε.» που λέγανε ότι αυτό είναι «απαραίτητο κακό».
Σήμερα η κατάσταση έχει πλέον ξεφύγει[1] και ο καθένας λέει ότι θέλει.
Those who argue that Open Source AI Definition #OSAID was hastily crafted to prevent big tech from abusing the term ‘open-source’ only need to look at who sponsors it. If that fails to shatter their illusions, then they’ve simply chosen their side.
As for everyone else, it’s time to see clearly that only an unyielding commitment to freedom can serve as a steadfast beacon in resisting techno-feudalism.
My #fosdem Sunday started with "AI" and EU policy. The speakers presented #OSAID as a urgent necessity we must accept.
I manged to squeeze two observations in the discussion:
1) We are now 60 years since someone claimed that "AI is close to interfere with all human activity in 2 years"
2) #OSAID didn't stopped META from openwashing AI. On the contrary it helped them. META claims that it is opensource because of the vague terms in OSAID. Free/Non Free is binary - there isn't a middle ground (1/2)
#OSAID practically died today in #fossdem . During the talk "When is an AI system free/open?" it was severely criticized, even by people working at Amazon, IBM and the USA government. But OSAID wasn't a slip-up but rather a systemic outcome. #opensource demotes freedom over being "corporate friendly". This lead in the unmemorable presentation "How Does Heinz Have 80% of a Commodity Market?" which claimed that copyleft restricted freedom and that software trademarks are being misunderstood!!!
EU Open Source Policy Summit 2025 has begun.
Pretty sure the #OSAID will be a topic...
