# We heard you: let's focus on substantive discussion

**URL:** <https://discuss.opensource.org/t/we-heard-you-lets-focus-on-substantive-discussion/589>\
**Category:** Open Source AI\
**Created:** [September 24, 2024, 2:49pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/we-heard-you-lets-focus-on-substantive-discussion/589 "2024-09-24T14:49:27Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 8

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Shamar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/94ad74/32.png) [@Shamar](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/Shamar)\
**Post date:** [September 25, 2024, 12:36am UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/we-heard-you-lets-focus-on-substantive-discussion/589/8 "2024-09-25T00:36:04Z")

</div>

> [@anon18632855](#):
>
> voting is not an appropriate way to reach consensus on technical topics

To be honest, as one with a decent training in statistics and operational research, I find the whole method a bit weird.

You shouldn’t need to ask expert about predicates that logically derive from the declared goal of granting the four freedoms.

I’d really like to read the reasoning of those who did “vote” for training data availability as “not required” to study and modify, because, for example, I really can’t imagine an effective way to study the behavior of any AI system (not only a ANN-based one) without the training data. Even just identifying over-fitting around certain clusters would be impossible without the actual data.

> [@anon18632855](#):
>
> the AI behemoths (who got a vote while we didn’t

And this is another issue with the method: who selected the experts? according to which criteria? who decided the criteria?

For example, I wonder why Llama experts were included since [Llama is not open source](https://www.llama.com/llama3/license/) and [Mark Zuckerberg publicly try to **open wash** it anyway](https://about.fb.com/news/2024/07/open-source-ai-is-the-path-forward/).

> [@gvlx](#):
>
> the license used on **users data.**

Well I’d argue that an AI system trained on people’s (please, do not reduce them to “users”) data that cannot be distributed **and** [are not available to the public](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/rfc-separating-concerns-between-source-data-and-processing-information/568), cannot match any open source AI definition.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/we-heard-you-lets-focus-on-substantive-discussion/589)._