|
|
|
|
|
|
by anticorporate
888 days ago
|
|
|
The Open Source Initiative, who maintain the Open Source Definition, have been running a whole series over the past year to collect input from all sorts of stakeholders about what it means for an AI to be open source. I was lucky enough to participate in an afternoon long session with about a hundred other people last year at All Things Open. https://deepdive.opensource.org/ I encourage you to go check out what's already being done here. I promise it's way more nuanced than anything than is going to fit on a tweet. |
|
|
Anyway, to go on a tangent, some day maybe with zero knowledge proofs we will be able to prove that a given pretrained model was indeed the result of training using a given dataset, in a way that can be verified vastly cheaper than training the model itself from scratch. (This same technique could also be applied to other things like verifying if a binary was compiled from a given source with a given compiler, hopefully verified in a cheaper way than compiling and applying all optimizations from scratch).
If this ever materialize, then we can just demand proofs.
Here's a study on that
https://montrealethics.ai/experimenting-with-zero-knowledge-...
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3576915.3623202
And here is another
https://eprint.iacr.org/2023/1174