The Free Software Foundation Finally Has AI / Machine Learning Apps On Their Radar

[phoronix]

Phoronix: The Free Software Foundation Finally Has AI / Machine Learning Apps On Their Radar

The Free Software Foundation announced on Tuesday they have begun work on "freedom in machine learning applications". Or in particular, a to-be-issued "statement" on free machine learning applications for software and the associated scripts and training data...

https://www.phoronix.com/news/FSF-Freedom-AI-ML-Software

[sophisticles]

I know that I just can't wait to see the massive improvement that the AI/ML landscape will experience once the FSF releases their statement.

It's not like it's a completely useless and meaningless gesture from an organization that is self-deluded in their belief that they actually are worth a damn.

[dp_alvarez]

It is very sad to see, on Phoronix of all places, the FSF being ridiculed when it was the founding father of the free software world we claim to defend.

The main goal of FSF is not developing software, it is defending freedom in the software space. Deriding them for not developing much in the way of commercially relevant software is missing the point of the organization.

The movement behind free and open-source software is what created the entire ecosystem Phoronix reports about, and it started with the FSF defining what was free software, and publishing the GPL to serve as a practical way of building a free software ecosystem.

Now they are trying to do the same for AI applications because it's clear that the FOSS old definitions do not apply anymore. Model weights and source code begin distributed don't truly ensure user freedom when the data and methods to create those weights are kept a secret.

The FSF giving clear and practical definitions of what is needed to make AI software truly free would be huge starting point if those definitions gain traction like the GPL once did. It is one of the very few organizations I trust to come up with an "AI license" that actually defends user freedom.

Sadly it seems ever less likely that will happen. Now big tech controls most of the internet, is slowly seizing pieces of FOSS software, and (successfully) manipulating people in believing the people and organizations that created the free software movement should be ignored or directly attacked.

[cynic]

It is very sad to see, on Phoronix of all places, the FSF being ridiculed when it was the founding father of the free software world we claim to defend.

The main goal of FSF is not developing software, it is defending freedom in the software space. Deriding them for not developing much in the way of commercially relevant software is missing the point of the organization.

The movement behind free and open-source software is what created the entire ecosystem Phoronix reports about, and it started with the FSF defining what was free software, and publishing the GPL to serve as a practical way of building a free software ecosystem.

Now they are trying to do the same for AI applications because it's clear that the FOSS old definitions do not apply anymore. Model weights and source code begin distributed don't truly ensure user freedom when the data and methods to create those weights are kept a secret.

The FSF giving clear and practical definitions of what is needed to make AI software truly free would be huge starting point if those definitions gain traction like the GPL once did. It is one of the very few organizations I trust to come up with an "AI license" that actually defends user freedom.

Sadly it seems ever less likely that will happen. Now big tech controls most of the internet, is slowly seizing pieces of FOSS software, and (successfully) manipulating people in believing the people and organizations that created the free software movement should be ignored or directly attacked.

I do agree with you with the important role of the FSF.

Unfortunately, lately many of the foundations in the FOSS echosystem became a ridiculous waste of money and bearers of questionable values.
People are rightly starting to be wary of these type of organizations.

[grigi]

No, its more like the FSF is the plucky rebels fighting against the Emperial big tech. Of course it's a losing battle.
But they really should be helped, and not ridiculed.

[bavay]

The main goal of FSF is not developing software, it is defending freedom in the software space. Deriding them for not developing much in the way of commercially relevant software is missing the point of the organization.
[...]
The FSF giving clear and practical definitions of what is needed to make AI software truly free would be huge starting point if those definitions gain traction like the GPL once did.

Exactly! While I find the FSF role quite irrelevant with respect to GNU HURD or endorsed hardware that is decades behind, it is its role to define principles and licenses. And for this, they are not that late: although we would all like to first define standards and then implement them in software, in practice there is a long phase of writing software, at some point sitting down and defining standards and then porting the software to the newly defined standard. Here the FSF contributes guidelines that should prove useful in the future.

[Setif]

Says the foundation that most of their projects still uses mailing-lists for everything (bug- reporting, discussions, contributions...etc)
Still using the archaic autotools...etc.
Their websites look like from 1990's.
If the FSF wants to be attractive and relevant then it should keep up with the current generation.

[cynic]

Says the foundation that most of their projects still uses mailing-lists for everything (bug- reporting, discussions, contributions...etc)
Still using the archaic autotools...etc.
Their websites look like from 1990's.
If the FSF wants to be attractive and relevant then it should keep up with the current generation.

or maybe we should teach new generations to go beyond mere appearence?

[ahrs]

Says the foundation that most of their projects still uses mailing-lists for everything (bug- reporting, discussions, contributions...etc)
Still using the archaic autotools...etc.
Their websites look like from 1990's.
If the FSF wants to be attractive and relevant then it should keep up with the current generation.

How would you attract the current generation without compromising on the FSF's values is the question?

There is definitely an argument to be had somewhere that the FSF should be more active on social media in spreading their message and activism, etc, but they won't do that because these platforms are all run on top of non-free software (Fediverse not withstanding, but nobody will see you there).

I genuinely think the FSF's days as an activism organisation are numbered. It's an expensive money sink.
As a boring legal organisation they can at least do the one thing they've always been good at, writing licensing agreements.

[archkde]

It is very sad to see, on Phoronix of all places, the FSF being ridiculed when it was the founding father of the free software world we claim to defend.

The main goal of FSF is not developing software, it is defending freedom in the software space. Deriding them for not developing much in the way of commercially relevant software is missing the point of the organization.

The movement behind free and open-source software is what created the entire ecosystem Phoronix reports about, and it started with the FSF defining what was free software, and publishing the GPL to serve as a practical way of building a free software ecosystem.

Now they are trying to do the same for AI applications because it's clear that the FOSS old definitions do not apply anymore. Model weights and source code begin distributed don't truly ensure user freedom when the data and methods to create those weights are kept a secret.

The old definitions actually do still apply perfectly. Source code is defined as the preferred form of modification, which model weights together with source code of the inference application are not. This argument is not exactly new either, and just because some companies like to stretch the definitions for advertisement purposes, it doesn't become less valid.