# \#draft **URL:** https://discuss.opensource.org/tag/draft/1.md [Latest](https://discuss.opensource.org/latest.md) · [Categories](https://discuss.opensource.org/categories.md) · [Tags](https://discuss.opensource.org/tags.md) --- ## [FSF announced basics of free ML Application definition](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/fsf-announced-basics-of-free-ml-application-definition/739)
**Author:** [@peterbrownq](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/peterbrownq)\ **Replies:** 1\ **Last updated:** [October 24, 2024, 1:00pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/fsf-announced-basics-of-free-ml-application-definition/739 "2024-10-24T13:00:54Z")
https://www.fsf.org/news/fsf-is-working-on-freedom-in-machine-learning-applications The key point is they do not agree with OSI that ML models with nonfree training data should be labeled as nonproprietary and so those … --- ## [Checklist is available for comments](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/checklist-is-available-for-comments/659)
**Author:** [@shujisado](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/shujisado)\ **Replies:** 3\ **Last updated:** [October 10, 2024, 6:45pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/checklist-is-available-for-comments/659 "2024-10-10T18:45:10Z")
The discussion on “Training data access” is important, but since the OSI has indicated the above focus areas until October 28, let’s gather opinions within this scope. While recruiting endorsers and preparing for All T… --- ## [Proposal to handle Data Openness in the Open Source AI definition \[RFC\]](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/proposal-to-handle-data-openness-in-the-open-source-ai-definition-rfc/561)
**Author:** [@quaid](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/quaid)\ **Replies:** 21\ **Last updated:** [October 8, 2024, 4:54pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/proposal-to-handle-data-openness-in-the-open-source-ai-definition-rfc/561 "2024-10-08T16:54:22Z")
Friends, As I’ve been researching many different efforts that claim various levels of Open Source AI, I’ve noticed a pattern around the types of training datasets used for a model. This pattern has led me to a possible… --- ## [Draft v.0.0.9 of the Open Source AI Definition is available for comments](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/draft-v-0-0-9-of-the-open-source-ai-definition-is-available-for-comments/513)
**Author:** [@system](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/system)\ **Replies:** 41\ **Last updated:** [October 3, 2024, 6:44am UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/draft-v-0-0-9-of-the-open-source-ai-definition-is-available-for-comments/513 "2024-10-03T06:44:22Z")
Originally published at: Community input drives the new draft of the Open Source AI Definition – Open Source Initiative The Open Source AI Definition v0.0.9 has been released and collaboration continues at in-person … --- ## [Should testing data be made available to \*use\* an AI system?](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/should-testing-data-be-made-available-to-use-an-ai-system/139)
**Author:** [@stefano](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/stefano)\ **Replies:** 13\ **Last updated:** [September 29, 2024, 5:27pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/should-testing-data-be-made-available-to-use-an-ai-system/139 "2024-09-29T17:27:57Z")
One area of disagreement that emerged in this week’s Llama 2 work group meeting (slides forthcoming) is whether testing data sets are technically required to use an AI system. What do you think? Is it necessary to make … --- ## [Distribitions vs Services](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/distribitions-vs-services/480)
**Author:** [@jberkus](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/jberkus)\ **Replies:** 2\ **Last updated:** [July 26, 2024, 3:10pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/distribitions-vs-services/480 "2024-07-26T15:10:52Z")
Folks, one of the problems I think that we’re encountering when discussing certification is the question of what is being certified. A lot of the discussion to date implies that an actual, running system as installed – … --- ## [How to describe the acceptable terms to receive documentation?](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/how-to-describe-the-acceptable-terms-to-receive-documentation/313)
**Author:** [@stefano](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/stefano)\ **Replies:** 7\ **Last updated:** [July 12, 2024, 5:48pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/how-to-describe-the-acceptable-terms-to-receive-documentation/313 "2024-07-12T17:48:49Z")
The table in the checklist contains a column that refers to the acceptable legal framework for each of the components. A comment from @hook and a discussion at the in-person workshop last week highlighted that the term … --- ## [GPL2 kernel source as an MIT-licensed model: Is this really open?](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/gpl2-kernel-source-as-an-mit-licensed-model-is-this-really-open/406)
**Author:** [@mjbommar](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/mjbommar)\ **Replies:** 1\ **Last updated:** [June 23, 2024, 3:14pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/gpl2-kernel-source-as-an-mit-licensed-model-is-this-really-open/406 "2024-06-23T15:14:45Z")
As discussed with @stefano and @spotaws on LinkedIn, I am deeply concerned that we are ignoring the legal status of the most important dependency for this draft - the training data. We would never support a standard tha… --- ## [Overarching concerns with Draft v.0.0.8 and suggested modifications](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/overarching-concerns-with-draft-v-0-0-8-and-suggested-modifications/347)
**Author:** [@juliaferraioli](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/juliaferraioli)\ **Replies:** 10\ **Last updated:** [May 19, 2024, 5:55pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/overarching-concerns-with-draft-v-0-0-8-and-suggested-modifications/347 "2024-05-19T17:55:34Z")
Hi everyone, After lengthy discussions, we have serious concerns about the feasibility of the draft in its current form based on our experiences as open source practitioners, machine learning researchers, and recovering… --- ## [Draft v.0.0.8 of the Open Source AI Definition is available for comments](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/draft-v-0-0-8-of-the-open-source-ai-definition-is-available-for-comments/315)
**Author:** [@stefano](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/stefano)\ **Replies:** 10\ **Last updated:** [May 15, 2024, 7:39pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/draft-v-0-0-8-of-the-open-source-ai-definition-is-available-for-comments/315 "2024-05-15T19:39:34Z")
We reached a milestone with draft v.0.0.8: The Open Source AI Definition is feature complete. This version of the document has all the elements required to evaluate if an AI system is Open Source. This also mark the app… --- ## [Draft v.0.0.7 of the Open Source AI Definition is available for comments](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/draft-v-0-0-7-of-the-open-source-ai-definition-is-available-for-comments/298)
**Author:** [@stefano](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/stefano)\ **Replies:** 7\ **Last updated:** [April 19, 2024, 7:53am UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/draft-v-0-0-7-of-the-open-source-ai-definition-is-available-for-comments/298 "2024-04-19T07:53:12Z")
A new draft is out for comments. The changelog: Incorporating the comments to draft v.0.0.6 and results of the working group analysis removed reference to “the public” in the 4 freedoms, left the object (users) implied … --- ## [The data requirement: "Sufficiently detailed information" for what?](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/the-data-requirement-sufficiently-detailed-information-for-what/276)
**Author:** [@moodler](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/moodler)\ **Replies:** 3\ **Last updated:** [April 8, 2024, 8:56am UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/the-data-requirement-sufficiently-detailed-information-for-what/276 "2024-04-08T08:56:31Z")
It’s not that I thought full data was a requirement, just that things were vague enough to go either way. For the required part: “Sufficiently detailed information” means nothing … I would say we should use words abo… --- ## [Training data access](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/training-data-access/152)
**Author:** [@lumin](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/lumin)\ **Replies:** 65\ **Last updated:** [March 15, 2024, 3:11am UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/training-data-access/152 "2024-03-15T03:11:31Z")
I’ve mentioned this multiple times in the private mailing list. Now bringing it here again becaue this is one of the biggest elephant in the room issue. I suggest that at least “open access” training data is required to… --- ## [Compatibility/Boundary between OSD/OSAID](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/compatibility-boundary-between-osd-osaid/255)
**Author:** [@lumin](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/lumin)\ **Replies:** 2\ **Last updated:** [March 6, 2024, 3:49pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/compatibility-boundary-between-osd-osaid/255 "2024-03-06T15:49:28Z")
Yet another inevitable issue is the compatibility or boundary issue between open source definition (OSD) and open source AI definition (OSAID). Should we consider OSAID a super set of OSD, where OSAID adds additional st… --- ## [Add definition of "AI model"](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/add-definition-of-ai-model/252)
**Author:** [@shujisado](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/shujisado)\ **Replies:** 2\ **Last updated:** [March 6, 2024, 5:09am UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/add-definition-of-ai-model/252 "2024-03-06T05:09:36Z")
I propose that OSAID include a clause defining the meaning of the term AI model. I recognize that the primal reason we are developing the OSAID definition in the first place is that AI models are unlikely to give rise t… --- ## [Is the definition of "AI system" by the OECD too broad?](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/is-the-definition-of-ai-system-by-the-oecd-too-broad/156)
**Author:** [@stefano](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/stefano)\ **Replies:** 15\ **Last updated:** [March 4, 2024, 4:15am UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/is-the-definition-of-ai-system-by-the-oecd-too-broad/156 "2024-03-04T04:15:20Z")
In a comment to draft 0.0.4, Shuji Sado (佐渡秀治) wrote: The OECD’s definition of AI defines a wide range of reasoning systems as AI. It seems to me that this applies to a wider range of systems than those generally refer… --- ## [Report from Pythia working group](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/report-from-pythia-working-group/226)
**Author:** [@stefano](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/stefano)\ **Replies:** 1\ **Last updated:** [February 23, 2024, 5:00pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/report-from-pythia-working-group/226 "2024-02-23T17:00:20Z")
Scope of this exercise is to find the answers to the questions below, keeping in mind a simplified OECD’s definition: “An AI system is a system that given an input produces an output. With this in mind, think of what is … --- ## [A new draft of the Open Source AI Definition: v.0.0.5 is available for comments](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/a-new-draft-of-the-open-source-ai-definition-v-0-0-5-is-available-for-comments/174)
**Author:** [@stefano](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/stefano)\ **Replies:** 3\ **Last updated:** [February 19, 2024, 11:26pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/a-new-draft-of-the-open-source-ai-definition-v-0-0-5-is-available-for-comments/174 "2024-02-19T23:26:19Z")
A new draft is now available for comments. This is the first release to contain a very early draft of the “checklist”. It’s based on the Model Openness Framework being developed by LF AI & Data/Generative AI Commons. Th… --- ## [Do we need to mention the level of autonomy of AI systems?](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/do-we-need-to-mention-the-level-of-autonomy-of-ai-systems/157)
**Author:** [@stefano](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/stefano)\ **Replies:** 5\ **Last updated:** [February 18, 2024, 4:02am UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/do-we-need-to-mention-the-level-of-autonomy-of-ai-systems/157 "2024-02-18T04:02:28Z")
In a comment to draft 0.0.4, @zack asked to remove the text of the OECD definition Different AI systems vary in their levels of autonomy and adaptiveness after deployment. because it’s generic (and pretty obvious) inf… --- ## [Report from Llama2 working group](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/report-from-llama2-working-group/213)
**Author:** [@stefano](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/stefano)\ **Replies:** 0\ **Last updated:** [February 16, 2024, 10:32am UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/report-from-llama2-working-group/213 "2024-02-16T10:32:10Z")
Scope of this exercise is to find the answers to the questions below, keeping in mind a simplified OECD’s definition: “An AI system is a system that given an input produces an output. With this in mind, think of what is … --- ## [Is the verb "Use" clear enough?](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/is-the-verb-use-clear-enough/160)
**Author:** [@stefano](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/stefano)\ **Replies:** 4\ **Last updated:** [February 15, 2024, 7:50am UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/is-the-verb-use-clear-enough/160 "2024-02-15T07:50:05Z")
In a comment to draft 0.0.4, Shuji Sado added a comment to the word “Use” in the “What is Open Source AI”: Use the system for any purpose and without having to ask for permission. he wrote: The word “Use” has a ve… --- ## [Does the "Share" verb need clarification?](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/does-the-share-verb-need-clarification/172)
**Author:** [@stefano](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/stefano)\ **Replies:** 6\ **Last updated:** [February 11, 2024, 10:45pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/does-the-share-verb-need-clarification/172 "2024-02-11T22:45:16Z")
The “Share” verb is currently written as: Share the system for others to use with or without modifications, for any purpose. A \[comment on drafts\](The Open Source AI Definition - HackMD 0.0.3 and 0.0.4 by pseudonym A… --- ## [Clarifications needed on the Out of scope section in draft 0.0.4](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/clarifications-needed-on-the-out-of-scope-section-in-draft-0-0-4/173)
**Author:** [@stefano](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/stefano)\ **Replies:** 0\ **Last updated:** [January 30, 2024, 4:56pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/clarifications-needed-on-the-out-of-scope-section-in-draft-0-0-4/173 "2024-01-30T16:56:28Z")
The section “Out of scope issues” received a few comments from @zack @shujisado and Aspie96. Version 0.0.5 has some improvement but it’s leaving unaddressed some of the issues raised. I’d love to hear more thoughts and …