The AI Revolution: A License to Deceive?
The eternal struggle between open source and proprietary software has finally found its way into the burgeoning artificial intelligence space, with controversy in hot pursuit. But is the notion of "open source AI" just a clever marketing ploy or a genuine attempt to democratize the development of AI systems?
The Open Source Initiative (OSI), a not-for-profit public benefit corporation, has been working on a definition for open source AI for over two years. But the journey has been marked by controversy, with some arguing that the concept of open source AI is oxymoronic. After all, AI systems are not software code, and the fundamental rights of open source don’t translate over to neural network weights.
The OSI’s executive director, Stefano Maffulli, agrees that there are significant differences between open source software and open source AI. "In software, source code and binary code are two views of the same artifact. But training datasets and the subsequent trained models are distinct things," he said.
The debate has led to the creation of a new definition, which is expected to be finalized at the All Things Open conference in October. But the question remains: what does it mean for an AI system to be "open source"?
The Problem with Meta’s Llama
Meta’s Llama-branded large language models have been hailed as "open source" by some, but the company’s restrictions on how the models can be used have raised eyebrows. The models can be used for free for research and commercial purposes, but app developers with more than 700 million monthly users must request a special license from Meta, which it will grant purely at its own discretion.
This has led some to question the sincerity of Meta’s commitment to open source. "Everyone else that is involved in the conversation is perfectly agreeing that Llama itself cannot be considered open source," Maffulli said. "People I’ve spoken with who work at Meta, they know that it’s a little bit of a stretch."
The Conflict of Interest
The OSI’s reliance on corporate funding has also raised concerns. Meta, along with other tech giants, provides significant funding to the OSI, which has led some to question the organization’s independence. "There is a conflict of interest here," said Joseph Jacks, open source evangelist and founder of OSS Capital. "A company that has shown a desire to piggyback off the open source branding also provides finances to the stewards of ‘the definition’?"
The Future of Open Source AI
The debate around open source AI is far from over. The OSI’s definition is expected to be a starting point for further discussion and refinement. But the stakes are high. If the definition is not robust enough, it could lead to a proliferation of proprietary AI systems that undermine the very principles of open source.
As the AI revolution continues to unfold, one thing is clear: the future of open source AI will be shaped by the decisions we make today. Will we choose to empower developers and researchers with open source AI, or will we allow proprietary interests to dominate the field? The choice is ours.
