Re: Proposal -- Interpretation of DFSG on Artificial Intelligence (AI) Models

Hi,

On Sun, 2025-04-27 at 18:47 +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> My concern for Japanese keyboard input method was addressed in
> "ToxicCandy Allowlist" by assessing it as non-AI model in ML-policy.

Could we stop using terms like "toxic" or "cancerous" or whatever in
technical discussions? (Unless we talk about toxic products or cancer
treatment or similar.)

> The current policy proposal is vague at what is not "AI models" and
> it lacks direct reference to "ToxicCandy Allowlist".  (Why missing?
> or did I overlook something?)

The GR proposal does not talk about this, but the notes in the proposal
explicitly state:

| Note: While nowadays people use "AI" to refer to LLMs, it is a very broad term
|   that covers much more than language models. AI models apart from language
|   models must be considered as well, such as computer vision models, audio
|   recognition models, etc.

So the intent seems to be a broad interpretation of what AI means, so
probably including models for input methods built from other source
data.

Ansgar

>