🔍 New proposal: A vocabulary for opting out from AI training & text/data mining.
Based on interaction with a broad range of stakeholders, this proposal aims to give creators and other rightholders more control over how their works are used for AI training through practical, machine-readable standards.
📄 Full paper & vocabulary: https://openfuture.eu/publication/a-vocabulary-for-opting-out-of-ai-training-and-other-forms-of-tdm/
#ParadoxOfOpen #AITraining
New piece by Mariana Mazzucato argues that there's no "collective intelligence" without the "common good". Probably obvious to most of people here. She makes a good argument for the not-yet convinced.
And "collective intelligence" is indeed becoming an overly-romantic buzzword and narrative.
Same risk, by the way, appllies to narratives about communities and communal governance.
1 Post, 30 Following, 4 Followers · Agriculture, Data Ethics, and the Commons PhD Researcher at the Centre for Technomoral Futures and the Global Academy of Agriculture and Food Systems (University of Edinburgh)
The Cuckoo in Bidding: When the Manufacturer Loses to Itself by Peer Heinlein 💯
"OSS manufacturers must be financially compensated for their work to enable further development. When freeloaders enter bidding processes with cutthroat prices without manufacturer involvement, they strip the OSS ecosystem of its foundation. Various initiatives aim to ensure fair and sustainable use."
#FOSSBack #TragedyOfOpen #ParadoxOfOpen
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8YJQLIw2EI&ab_channel=PlainSchwarz
I've been reading up on recent #OpenAccess developments, including proposals for new approaches like #DiamondOA.
The discussions are fascinating, and it's increasing clear to me that Open Access ecosystems are facing a case of what we call (at @openfuture ) the #ParadoxofOpen: OA faces the challenge of value extraction, in this case by the largest academic publishers.
It's just as fascinating to see solutions on the table: proposals for alternative publishing models that are more sovereign, civic, community-led. Basically: digital public infrastructures.
This recent news feature from Nature is a good starting point:
Jorge Gemetto from @articaonline wrote a good piece on #generativeAI, #freeknowledge and cultural rights.
(It's in Spanish, and worth translating if you don’t speak the language).
Jorge argues that the emerging tensions around AI and intellectual property are a tension between two business sectors: the technology and the publishing firms. And it largely ignores the interests and rights of creatives, other professionals (benefitting from free knowledge / free culture) and users.
He acknowledges what I call the #ParadoxofOpen: that corporations benefit disproportionately from the commons (and the case of generative AI training is one more example of that) - but argues that this is not a reason for a ‘reactionary’ approach that constraints the commons.
And finally there’s a smart take on the right to cultural expression and how that plays out with regard to access to generative AI systems.
A partir de la disponibilidad de herramientas como DALL-E, Stable Diffusion o Midjourney para la generación de imágenes, y ChatGPT, Bard, Open Assistant o los cientos de bots conversacionales basados en LLaMA, millones de personas comenzaron a experimentar con la creación de textos e imágenes asisti
This recent piece from @kaythaney strikes all the right ideas in framing today’s challenges faced by #openaccess / #openscience. And it’s in line with the #ParadoxofOpen framing that I’ve been working on.
Kaitlin argues that Open Access has become big business, and that revenues flow more quickly for the companies than the benefits for the communities producing knowledge. That’s the gist of the Paradox of Open: the commons are being exploited.
I like the point that thanks to OA, and through the exploitative modes of publishers, “OA is free to read but not free or affordable to publish”.
And Kaitlin argues that publishers would ideally dedicate a portion of profits back into the communities (the commons). +1 to that. That’s the reason that I really like the Wikimedia Enterprise project, which shows that payments back to the commons can be part of an open framework.
The problem wiki Wikimedia ENterprise is that it is voluntary - so the big question is, how can such redistribution be mandated?
A starting point would be for #openX communities (not just #OA / #openscience but also #opensource, for example, have a shared position on the need for such redistribution.
Open Future Foundation
Alek
Serkan Holat
