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

[r_a_trip]

then try to find a middle ground: let's modernize FSF so it can be appealing to the youngsters but without renouncing to the contents in favour of empty appearence.

Was it ever an either/or? Substantive ideology doesn't need to be sacrificed when presenting it in an attractive package. The message of Software Freedom is a thing all of us should strive for. Now more than ever.

Want to reach the youngsters? Why is your phone locked down? Why shouldn't you have multiple ways to easily install software. Why do you have to pay with your privacy to use a device? Security as an excuse for abuse is not acceptable. Etc.

Just don't make it look like grandpa handcoded the website in notepad. Ever asked yourself why all the sites of the big baddies look so slick? Because it makes it easier to attract people to your message. A spoon full of sugar makes the medicine go down. I see no harm in employing the same tactics to spread actually useful information.

Phones and tablets are worse off than desktops and laptops, yet we don't see a strong push to rectify that. No one is on the barricades for user rights. The past decade the FSF has acted very lukewarm. More a "don't do that", than a "we will have a sit in at your headquarters if you don't listen!"

[Anux]

Would Linus Torvalds have known about and adopted the GPL for Linux if the FSF just put it on their website and had not promoted it?

Sure, back then it was a really small community of devs that regularly talked with each other and there weren't many free licenses to choose from, MIT maybe? And he was asked by GNU devs to add copyleft which would only be possible with a custom license or GPL. https://mirrors.edge.kernel.org/pub/.../RELNOTES-0.12 so you certainly have a point but we can't know if it would have been different if GNU didn't exist, because GPL wouldn't have existed then. Today FSF and GPL are so famous in the free software world that you would at least take a look there if you search for a license for your project.

However if it is going to be a drop on their website and no strong advocating, who will seriously look at it?

Free software lovers? Me at least but I don't plan any AI stuff.

In the end it doesn't matter. ML in the FOSS sphere will get a license, one way or another. It just might not be an FSF one.

Of course.

[rhadlee]

Being late is not the issue here.

I would instead question their requirements for “free” AI/ML applications. Having access to all data, scripts, parameters etc. does not necessarily result in ethical software, which is a huge concern for AI. This seems the greater concern compared with opaque training data or proprietary model weights.

Also, even if all the aforementioned data is made available and users could theoretically re-train a model based on their customisation: this is impractical for most people due to the excessive hardware and electricity cost. This may seem like a detail, but it matters and it is in stark difference to normal (non AI) free software that can be compiled and run on cheap hardware.

[skeevy420]

I'm sad that Phoronix felt the need to attack a member of the Free Software movement. Phoronix should be objective and not mix personal opinions into news items. What was gained by this attack i must ask ? I feel it was totally unnecessary.

Yeah, the personal opinions should have been a separate article. Mixing in personal opinions like that is what Fox does to spin the narrative.

[skeevy420]

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

If you want to write with a dip and nib setup, cool, but keyboards are more efficient and faster.

I'm saying that it isn't always about appearance, it's about teaching the old dog new tricks.

[anda_skoa]

Being late is not the issue here.
Also, even if all the aforementioned data is made available and users could theoretically re-train a model based on their customisation: this is impractical for most people due to the excessive hardware and electricity cost. This may seem like a detail, but it matters and it is in stark difference to normal (non AI) free software that can be compiled and run on cheap hardware.

Most people can't rebuild normal software either, yet FOSS licences are still extremely valuable.
And the idea behind FOSS licences is from a time when hardware was not cheap, even rare.

In the case of a model it might need a larger organisation, e.g. research institute, to rebuild and that could then be used to verify claims regarding the data being used to build any other releases of said model.

[phoron]

Most people can't rebuild normal software either, yet FOSS licences are still extremely valuable.

Free software users can. If they want, or know or want to learn is another story.

And the idea behind FOSS licences is from a time when hardware was not cheap, even rare.

I don't understand. The people able to use the software were generally able to compile it.
People without hardware didn't use software either. How could they?

In the case of a model it might need a larger organisation, e.g. research institute, to rebuild and that could then be used to verify claims regarding the data being used to build any other releases of said model.

Yes, I don't say the free AI license would be useless. Just that it is not a reason to rely on AI. There're other considerations.
More or less like free software used in SaaSS is no reason to use SaaSS.

[sophisticles]

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.

The sad thing is that 20+ people upvoted your comment.

Open source predates Stallman and his FSF by decades:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source

Furthermore, who died and left Stallman and the FSF arbiters of what is and is not "free software"?

I urge everyone to read what Stallman beliefs in his own words:

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bill-gates-and-other-communists.en.html

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/luispo-rms-interview.en.html

This is the guy you want to take your cues from?

Do you not have a functioning brain to think for yourself?

[anda_skoa]

Free software users can. If they want, or know or want to learn is another story.

The technical barrier is still too high for most users.

Once you managed to get across it doesn't look too hard anymore but your still in a minority.

I don't understand. The people able to use the software were generally able to compile it.
People without hardware didn't use software either. How could they?

You are thinking of privately owned computers. Most computers users back then were running only the software their employer would have them use.

Once we get into the home computer phase in the mid 1980s we move into the situation in which most people are facing the technical barrier mentioned above.

Unfortunately the barrier has become even worse in the last decade due to requirements for signing, walled garden app stores, etc.

[sophisticles]

Bunch of deluded morons are "trying" to insult FSF. The whole world runs on free software, idiots. Try to "do" anything without GNU toolchain or GNU utils. I guess the problem is you guys don't do anything other than adoring your own opinions.

The world runs on a mix of proprietary and open source solutions.

If you were to completely remove either one the world as you know it would grind to a halt.

Now please get back to donating 20 Euros to KDE, they need to buy a couple of burgers today.