Hi Mo,
your effort in driving this is much appreciated.
There's a second thread going on ("A different Take on AI") where many
have chimed into the deeper specific issues, so I'll include my specific
replies there, and here will only reply to formalities:
On 2025-02-02 06:56, M. Zhou wrote:
> (2
(1) do you know any important but missing reference materials?
You may want to include references to currents cases in court, like:
https://www.npr.org/2025/01/14/nx-s1-5258952/new-york-times-openai-microsoft
Maybe not that particular one, but something to the effect. By supporting
proposal B: "
hi,
about https://salsa.debian.org/lumin/gr-ai-dfsg/-/blob/main/README.txt
On Sun, Feb 02, 2025 at 12:56:59AM -0500, M. Zhou wrote:
> (2) are the options clear enough for vote? Considering lots of the readers may
> not be faimiliar with how AI is created. I tried to explain it, as well as
> the i
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 at 15:57, M. Zhou wrote:
> (1) do you know any important but missing reference materials?
Is it worth explicitly mentioning weights are also released under very
restrictive non-free licenses? The list of Apache/MIT licenses might
mislead a reader into believing all weights are
4 matches
Mail list logo
