• barsoap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    A foundation model is not an application. It’s up to the people wanting to run AI in a high-risk scenario to make sure that the models they’re using are up to the task, if they can’t say that about some FOSS model then they can’t use it. And, honestly, would you want some CV or college application scanner involve DeepDanbooru.

    • cyd@vlemmy.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The regulation not only puts obligations on users. Providers (which can include FOSS developers?) would have to seek approval for AI systems that touch on certain areas (e.g. vocational training), and providers of generative AI are liable to “design the model to prevent it from generating illegal content” and “publishing summaries of copyrighted data used for training”. The devil is in the details, and I’m not so sanguine about it being FOSS-friendly.

      • barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Ok here’s what parlimant passed, ie. its amendments

        Quoth:

        5e. This Regulation shall not apply to AI components provided under free and open-source licences except to the extent they are placed on the market or put into service by a provider as part of a high-risk AI system or of an AI system that falls under Title II or IV. This exemption shall not apply to foundation models as defined in Art 3.

        Interesting, no foundation model exception, though the FLOSS community isn’t going to train any of those soon in any case.

        More broadly speaking this is the same issue as with the cyber resiliance act and they’re definitly on top of it as to saying “we don’t want FLOSS to suffer by a misinterpretation of ‘to put on the market’”. Patience.