Comment by esperent
3 days ago
The OSI is an American organization founded in 1998, long after the term "Open Source" already had a clear meaning.
They have no right to make new and limited definitions for what Open Source means in other areas like LLMs. They can write and publish a definition if they like, but whether the rest of the world accepts it is another matter.
What's missing from the OSI definition in this case? How do you think it is limited compare to the standard usage?
Most importantly would be recognition that the data used to train the AI also needs to be openly available.