Most of us will have no voice at the AI Impact Summit in Delhi, and we need to be careful how we are represented by those who would speak for us. For many in the open learning community, Creative Commons takes on that role. This concerns me, because in my own case we have our difference. A case in point can be seen in the proposed system for "preferences to communicate how data holders wish their data to be used in AI is at its core a data governance mechanism." I know the words sound great, but the plan "to equip creators and data-holding communities with legible, scalable forms of agency" representing a shift from promoting openness to promoting greater means of control. And when they write "data governance is about making decisions, about choice," I don't agree. There's a vast difference between picking from predefined options, and forging one's own path. At this and other summits Creative Commons should be clear that its underlying interest isn't in representing openness, but in advocating for ownership.
Today: Total: [Direct link] [Share]
