# Is the definition of "AI system" by the OECD too broad?

**URL:** <https://discuss.opensource.org/t/is-the-definition-of-ai-system-by-the-oecd-too-broad/156>\
**Category:** Open Source AI\
**Tags:** draft\
**Created:** [January 29, 2024, 11:19am UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/is-the-definition-of-ai-system-by-the-oecd-too-broad/156 "2024-01-29T11:19:02Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 12

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![stefano](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/user_avatar/discuss.opensource.org/stefano/32/4_2.png) [@stefano](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/stefano)\
**Post date:** [February 16, 2024, 10:10am UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/is-the-definition-of-ai-system-by-the-oecd-too-broad/156/12 "2024-02-16T10:10:08Z")

</div>

> [@fontana](#):
>
> Where else has the OSI focused on “systems” and the boundaries that are implied by them?

Good question. For the FSD and OSD the target is `the program` or `software`, mentioned multiple times in the GNU Manifesto, whose meaning is (un)consciously recognized by practitioners. One could argue that those concepts are also quite vague in modern computing but let’s stick to AI.

I am still convinced that we should make the effort to have a clear target of what the freedoms refer to in the AI space. But I’d love to hear other opinions, too.

And I’d love to hear alternative proposals from you @fontana . The current OSAID starts by saying “this is what we’re talking about” (the AI system definition), followed by a condensed manifesto, then the freedoms, etc… Is your argument that we don’t need to define AI at all? How would you rephrase the manifesto?

---

_[View the full topic](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/is-the-definition-of-ai-system-by-the-oecd-too-broad/156)._