I don't want any one particular country, or organization, to "win" AI. I want AI capabilities to remain diffuse and spread out, so that everybody has access to approximately equal levels of AI. If anything, you might say that I want "Open Source to win AI".
2) That still equates to "Meta is not in the AI game any more" in meta-corporate speak
Getting free labour, lipstick of "freedom", and enable to put millions invested in what open source never can do: Scaling, infra, win big contracts, etc.
Open Source NEVER win the market game.
It only give consolation to few that can run things locally.
Otherwise big corporations and/or governments will own everything and most folks will be serfs. However if you can buy a few robots and go run a homestead then there can be a counterbalance of people not beholden to the system.
A telling sign of techno-feudalism will be AI becoming heavily regulated and even illegal for common people to make or own. You know because “public safety”.
But if electricity and hardware is a proxy for AI then those things are much less fungible. And if those two things in turn are not tied to the hip with money.
> If anything, you might say that I want "Open Source to win AI".
Has OSS won in terms of being software for the people?
The most widely used AI systems are controlled by a few billionaires. I'd like to see it become much more spread out.
I wish we had a good way to solve for that.