As i wrote in my comment i have not read up on Deepseek, if this is true it is definetly a step in the right direction.

I am not saying i expect any company of significant scale to follow OSI since, as you say, it is too high risk. I do still believe that if you cannot prove to me that your AI is not abusing artists or creators by using their art, or not using data non-consentually acquired from users of your platform, you are not providing an ethic or moral service. This is my main concern with AI. Big tech keeps showing us, time and time again, that they really dont care about about these topics and this needs to change.

Imo AI today is developing and expanding way too fast for the general consumer to understand it and by extension also the legal and justice systems. We need more laws in place regarding how to handle AI and the data they use and produce. We need more education on what AI actually is doing.

The Open Source Initiative have defined what they believe constitutes “open source AI” (https://opensource.org/ai/open-source-ai-definition). This includes detailed descriptions of training data, explanation on how it was obtained, selected, labeled, processed and filtered. As long as a company utilize any model trained on non-specified data I will assume it is either stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained from non-consenting users.

I will be clear that I have not read up on Deepseek yet, but I have a hard time believing their training data is specified according to OSI, since no big model yet has done so. Releasing the model source code means little for AI compared to all its training data.

I just like the analogy of a dashboard with knobs. Input text on one wide output text on the other. “Training” AI is simply letting the knobs adjust themselves based on feedback of the output. AI never “learns” it only produces output based on how the knobs are dialed in. Its not a magic box, its just a lot of settings converting data to new data.

The booklet has the “encouraged” procedures section where they state “sterilization reversal” which is just wild

This is just pure insanity, how can you possibly try to tell women the real choice is not having a choice? Even worse that this is being sneaked in as the the bill proposed to the house does not mention all of the stuff mentioned in the PWHC booklet.

Probably cheaper than the Shit 2