To trust AI, it must be open and transparent. Period.
To trust AI, it must be open and transparent. Period.
People started thinking, “We love Open Source software, so, let’s have Open Source AI, too.” But what is Open Source AI? And the answer is: we don’t know yet.
You're viewing a single thread.
To me, it seems there is a fallacy here:
- trust because one has no alternative/choice in the matter
- trustWORTHY
BOTH exist, and often one has to accept the inferior 1st one, like with proprietary operating-systems, e.g.
The 2nd is ideal, but if nobody produces the trustWORTHY computing, and only proprietary highjacking-the-world means are available, and one simply can't economically ( or otherwise ) survive without accepting the only-available-option,
then one is going to swallow the poison pill, isn't one?
Better to continue-functioning for awhile longer, than to die right-now, right?
that is the "choice" humankind is given.
Who is responsible for producing trustWORTHY computing?
Who is responsible for paying-for it?
Is it a "right" or even an "inalienable right"?
Doesn't moneyarchy have the established-right to prevent any alternative from existing, to subjugate/imprison humankind in its exploitation-container?
It would seem that the extant-situation embodies that moneyarchy-has-absolute-monarchy-right version, and if humankind wants to break that, it's going to have to break moneyarchy's dominion.
How, exactly, would that happen, in this world??