Lunduke
News • Science & Tech
Is the GNOME Foundation Going to Go Bankrupt in 1 Year?
It looks that way. And their only known plan to fix it involves a "Professional Shaman" & "sustainability, diversity, and inclusion". Seriously.
April 29, 2024
post photo preview

It's no secret that many Open Source organizations struggle to fund themselves -- with the GNOME Foundation being on more of a shoestring budget than you would expect for a project as widely used as GNOME.

To make matters worse, the GNOME Foundation has been paying for most of their expenses by draining their savings account (as they spend far more than they take in).

Now, apparently, those savings are running out.

What's more: The GNOME Foundation has been unusually silent about their operations -- not publishing any public reports for closing in on 2 years now.  And their strategy to save themselves from bankruptcy appears to center around "sustainability, diversity, and inclusion".

Seriously.

GNOME has "hit the buffers"

From an April 26th announcement from GNOME Foundation President, Robert McQueen:

"As you may be aware, the GNOME Foundation has operated at a deficit (nonprofit speak for a loss – ie spending more than we’ve been raising each year) for over three years, essentially running the Foundation on reserves from some substantial donations received 4-5 years ago. The Foundation has a reserves policy which specifies a minimum amount of money we have to keep in our accounts. This is so that if there is a significant interruption to our usual income, we can preserve our core operations while we work on new funding sources. We’ve now “hit the buffers” of this reserves policy, meaning the Board can’t approve any more deficit budgets – to keep spending at the same level we must increase our income."

In short: GNOME has run out of money.  In order to "keep spending at the same level" GNOME needs to find some money.

What sort of money are we talking about?

To fully understand the dire straits the GNOME Foundation finds itself in, let's take a look at what we know about their finances.

Unfortunately, the GNOME Foundation has not published any data in close to two years.  They have not published an annual report for 2023, and their most recent IRS records only cover their fiscal year up through September of 2022.

Which means we are forced to look at previous year's data and extrapolate forward based on what information we do have.

Source: GNOME Foundation 2022 Annual Report

In short, total expenses for the GNOME Foundation:

  • 2021: $926,821
  • 2022: $659,537

And the revenue for those same years...

  • 2021: $286,708
  • 2022: $363,380

Notice how the expenses far exceed the revenue?  Not good.  Subtract the expenses from the revenue and you have the net income.  And, boy howdy, is it deep into the negative.  Which means this is the amount they need to take out of their savings, every year, just to keep the lights on.

  • 2021: - $640,113
  • 2022: - $296,157

We know that GNOME is burning through between $296K and $640K, of savings, per year.  Which begs the question... how much do they have left in terms of cash reserves?

The GNOME Foundation Nest Egg

The most recent information we have, on the GNOME assets, comes from their IRS filings up through September of 2022 (their last publicly available filing).

Source: GNOME Foundation 990 IRS Filing for September, 2022

While those numbers don't exactly line up with the numbers stated in the GNOME Foundation's annual report, that's not entirely surprising.  Oftentimes, for these foundations, the annual reports and IRS filings will cover slightly different time periods (and be filed at different times, when different data is available).

Just the same, the numbers are close enough to the annual report that we can work with it.

But the listed assets on this page, as of 2022, really don't give us enough information.  This lists $909,107 in total net assets... but what we really need to know is how much "Savings and temporary cash investments" they have.

In other words: How much money can GNOME get their hands on, in short notice, to actively use for funding their immediate expenses?  For that, we'll need to look a few pages further down their IRS 990 form... at this line:

Source: GNOME Foundation 990 IRS Filing for September, 2022

Boom.  There we go.  $765,011.

That's how much the GNOME Foundation had, in September of 2022, in available savings.

How much money does GNOME have left... today?

Now here's where we're going to need to make some assumptions based on the data above.

I hate making assumptions... but, considering the lack of data from the GNOME Foundation, we're left with no other choice.

Let's assume that, in 2023, GNOME managed to keep their annual expenditures down to their 2022 levels (which was far, far lower than the 2021 levels... so this is close to "best case scenario").  And let's also assume that their income stayed steady as well.  How much savings would they have left?

Math time.  Savings minus the amount they need to withdraw from savings.

  • Oct, 2022 through Sep, 2023: $765,011 - $296,157 = $468,854

Now let's make the same assumption from that point (October 2023) through to present (April, 2024).  7 months in total.

We know that the total amount that GNOME would need to draw from their savings -- every month -- is roughly $24,679.75 ($296,157, the yearly savings withdrawal, divided by 12 months).  Thus, to get the amount of savings they've spent over the last 7 months... we simply multiply that number by 7.  For which we get $172,758.25.

  • Oct, 2023 through Apr, 2024: $468,854 - $172,758.25 = $296,095.75

In theory, that's how much money the GNOME Foundation has left in savings.  $296,095.75.

Why is that number significant?  Because that is almost exactly the amount of savings they will need to withdraw to stay afloat... for one year.

Remember.  From the announcement this week: "The Foundation has a reserves policy which specifies a minimum amount of money we have to keep in our accounts."

Could this be related to that number we came up with above?  It's possible.  It certainly would seem reasonable.  But, without better records and communication from the GNOME Foundation, we won't know for sure.

GNOME Foundation has One Year Left?

If their numbers have stayed consistent since September of 2022 -- which is a big if -- this means that The GNOME Foundation has enough funds to continue current operations through April of 2025.

At which point... the GNOME Foundation will need to significantly scale back their expenditures.

They will be forced to lay off the majority of their staff.

All of which raises a number of questions.

What is the new Executive Director doing to save GNOME?

In October of 2023, the GNOME Foundation hired a new Executive Director.  A person whose previous job was as a self-described "Professional Shaman" -- not religiously associated with Shamanism, mind you, but a person who sold "flavored Shaman water" and offered paid "Start your own Shaman business" training.

In the half year since that time, the new GNOME Executive Director, Holly Million, has had very little public presence -- no blog posts (after a short introduction), no social media activity, no major interviews, no response to press requests... totally quiet.  During the one publicly held event (a "Meet and Greet" last year), journalists were kicked out before it started and the planned recording was canceled for unknown reasons.

What has this GNOME Executive Director been doing to make sure that the GNOME Foundation does not go out of business?  It is a mystery.  Total silence.

In fact, one of the few indications we have as to the direction that the GNOME Foundation is taking, comes from Twitter posts by other GNOME Board members.  Namely, one from the GNOME Vice President, stating:

"excited about the progressive conversation we had with the executive director Holly Million. We engaged in extensive discussions regarding the strategic direction of @gnome, focusing on #sustainability, #diversity, and #inclusion. The future looks green"

Source: Twitter account for GNOME Vice President, Regina Nkenchor

From what little information we have, it appears that the GNOME profitability efforts are centered around "sustainability, diversity, and inclusion".

Oh, and "Hashtag: Technology".  With a shamrock emoji.

"How does that result in GNOME not going out of business," you ask?  I wish I could tell you.

But, according to this week's announcement by the GNOME President, fundraising is one of the key reasons why Holly Million was hired away from her Shaman job.

"One of the board’s top priorities in hiring Holly was therefore her experience in communications and fundraising, and building broader and more diverse support for our mission and work. Her goals since joining – as well as building her familiarity with the community and project – have been to set up better financial controls and reporting, develop a strategic plan, and start fundraising."

Communications.  Fundraising.  Financial reporting.

That's why their Executive Director was hired -- and those were her goals since she started work over half a year ago.

In that time the GNOME Executive Director has:

  • Given no interviews.
  • Been totally radio silent (no articles, social posts, podcasts, videos... nothing).
  • Not published any financial reports of any kind.  We have no clue what GNOME has been doing, financially, for almost 2 years now.
  • And, from what little we're being told, she has continued GNOME's deathmarch towards running out of money.

Those goals again: Communications.  Fundraising.  Financial reporting.

Sounds like a massive, unmitigated failure of all three goals to me.  And their plan to turn things around sounds like it centers on "sustainability, diversity, and inclusion"... which is not exactly a strong business plan.

What happens now?

It sounds like things are getting desperate.  And the GNOME Foundation will be announcing their plan to save The GNOME Foundation in the weeks ahead.

"The biggest prerequisite for fundraising is a clear strategy – we need to explain what we’re doing and why it’s important, and use that to convince people to support our plans. I’m very pleased to report that Holly has been working hard on this and meeting with many stakeholders across the community, and has prepared a detailed and insightful five year strategic plan. The plan defines the areas where the Foundation will prioritise, develop and fund initiatives to support and grow the GNOME project and community. The board has approved a draft version of this plan, and over the coming weeks Holly and the Foundation team will be sharing this plan and running a consultation process to gather feedback input from GNOME foundation and community members."

What is that plan?  How likely is that plan to succeed in bringing in enough funding to keep the foundation float?

At this point, we simply don't know.  The GNOME Foundation -- and their Executive Director -- is staying tight lipped and secretive.

All we know is that it includes "sustainability, diversity, and inclusion".

Wait.  What about that Million Euro investment?!

Right about now you might be remembering that, last year, the GNOME Foundation announced that they would be receiving 1 Million Euros from the Sovereign Tech Fund.

It sounds like those funds aren't for the foundation, but for specific development purposes:

"This money is received in the form of a contract for services rather than a grant to the Foundation, and must be spent on the development areas agreed during the planning and application process. It’s included within this year’s budget (October 23 – September 24) and is all expected to be spent during this fiscal year, so it doesn’t have an impact on the Foundation’s reserves position."

In other words: That million Euro?  It won't be beefing up their savings account.

What about Red Hat, SUSE, & Canonical?

GNOME is heavily relied upon by some of the biggest Linux companies on Earth.  

Right about now it's worth considering... why haven't Red Hat (or SUSE & Canonical, for that matter) stepped up to provide the needed funding for the foundation which supports their default Desktop Environment?

Maybe they can't.  Maybe they don't want to.  The reason for the lack of funding is entirely unknown.  But it's worth asking, just the same.

For that matter, where is The Linux Foundation?  This seems like exactly the sort of thing a "Linux" foundation -- with over a quarter of a Billion dollars in annual revenue -- could do to help "Linux".

This isn't the first time... but...

Is the GNOME Foundation poised to run out of money?  It certainly appears so.  And, clearly, the foundation leadership is concerned.

But this isn't the first time they've had money trouble.

Back in 2014 (10 years ago), there were serious concerns about the financials of the GNOME Foundation.  So much so that a spending freeze was put into place.

GNOME survived that 2014 financial dip, just as it could certainly survive this new one.  Yet the actions of the GNOME Foundation raises serious concerns and doubts.

  • Why is GNOME staying so secretive?  No published plans, no communication at all from their Executive Director, no published recent reports.
  • The only known details of their secret plan to avert a shut down are... "sustainability, diversity, and inclusion".  That can't be real... can it?  No serious software foundation would stare at possible bankruptcy... and make that a significant part of their strategy.
  • What has the Executive Director been doing for half a year?  Why hasn't there been any noteworthy fundraising or sponsorships?  Considering GNOME's unique place in the Linux and Open Source world, funding GNOME should not be an issue for anyone even slightly familiar with fundraising and the Linux corporate world.
  • Why have the large Linux & Open Source companies -- and The Linux Foundation -- not gotten involved?  What's going on there?

In the coming weeks, the GNOME Foundation has said that they will announce details of their secretive plan to keep their foundation alive.

For what it's worth, The Lunduke Journal is rooting for them -- and their secret plan.  Whatever it may be.  I truly hope it succeeds.

But, considering the bad financials and all of the other reasons outlined here, I remain less than optimistic.

Update: April 30th, 2024

While the GNOME Foundation has continued to refuse to speak with journalists, this article has created a bit of a firestorm within the GNOME community -- and has forced the GNOME Foundation President, Robert McQueen, to make a short statement.

That statement confirmed some of The Lunduke Journal's reporting regarding GNOME having 1 year of salary and expenses remaining:

"the reserves policy says we should keep 12 additional months of staff salary and expenses".

There were additional quotes, within that statement, which put a positive spin on the state of GNOME finances:

"The reason we’re hoping to raise more funds is our ambition to do more for the community"

 

"This year we’re expecting to break-even"

While these statements sound good, they are too vague and speculative to prove or disprove with the information we have available.  Likewise, they neither prove or disprove the reporting within this article (other than, at present, the GNOME Foundation is not breaking even).

What we now know for certain: GNOME been running a large deficit for several years, with their books showing a trajectory towards a fully depleted savings within 1 year unless they receive significant, new funding -- that fact has been confirmed by the GNOME Foundation.

The Lunduke Journal has, once again, reached out to the GNOME Foundation for further information.  However, given the foundation's lack of communication and transparency over the last 6 months, it seems unlikely that we'll know the true extent of the financial issues until we obtain updated financial records and annual reports (or until GNOME decides to publish their, at present, secret plans).

community logo
Join the Lunduke Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
36
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
Open Source AI Definition: Not Open, Built by DEI, Funded by Big Tech

Run by an "Anti-Racist, Decolonizing" Activist, the new Open Source Definition is anything but Open.

The article:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/5917220/open-source-ai-definition-not-open-built-by-dei-funded-by-big-tech

More from The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.com/

00:18:35
GNOME bans Manjaro Core Team Member for uttering "Lunduke"

The GNOME team has censored -- and deleted the account -- of the maintainer of Manjaro Linux GNOME Edition. Why? Because he linked to a Lunduke article.

GNOME bans Manjaro Core Team Member for uttering "Lunduke":
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/5908516/gnome-bans-manjaro-core-team-member-for-uttering-lunduke

More from The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.com/

00:17:16
GNOME Ousts Elected Board Member in Secret, Tells Nobody for 2 Months

Secret meetings. No transparency. Total chaos at the GNOME Foundation as they remove Sonny Piers, one of their Board Members, without telling anyone. This all happens right as the GNOME Executive Director quits, GNOME announces dire financial circumstances, and a disastrous "5 year plan" focusing on DEI.

The article:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/5899324/gnome-ousts-elected-board-member-in-secret-and-tells-nobody-for-2-months

More from The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.com/

00:37:30
November 22, 2023
The futility of Ad-Blockers

Ads are filling the entirety of the Web -- websites, podcasts, YouTube videos, etc. -- at an increasing rate. Prices for those ad placements are plummeting. Consumers are desperate to use ad-blockers to make the web palatable. Google (and others) are desperate to break and block ad-blockers. All of which results in... more ads and lower pay for creators.

It's a fascinatingly annoying cycle. And there's only one viable way out of it.

Looking for the Podcast RSS feed or other links? Check here:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4619051/lunduke-journal-link-central-tm

Give the gift of The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4898317/give-the-gift-of-the-lunduke-journal

The futility of Ad-Blockers
November 21, 2023
openSUSE says "No Lunduke allowed!"

Those in power with openSUSE make it clear they will not allow me anywhere near anything related to the openSUSE project. Ever. For any reason.

Well, that settles that, then! Guess I won't be contributing to openSUSE! 🤣

Looking for the Podcast RSS feed or other links?
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4619051/lunduke-journal-link-central-tm

Give the gift of The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4898317/give-the-gift-of-the-lunduke-journal

openSUSE says "No Lunduke allowed!"
September 13, 2023
"Andreas Kling creator of Serenity OS & Ladybird Web Browser" - Lunduke’s Big Tech Show - September 13th, 2023 - Ep 044

This episode is free for all to enjoy and share.

Be sure to subscribe here at Lunduke.Locals.com to get all shows & articles (including interviews with other amazing nerds).

"Andreas Kling creator of Serenity OS & Ladybird Web Browser" - Lunduke’s Big Tech Show - September 13th, 2023 - Ep 044

Heads up:

The Lunduke Computer Operating System forum is getting some structure... and, for those of you looking to get involved, posts are starting to go up discussing specific areas available for contribution.

https://lcosforum.lunduke.com/

I installed Llama 3.1 8B locally on my $600 windows 11 machine (Ryzen 7 mobile processor, 8 cores, 64gig ram, integrated gpu). Not exactly a high performance genai machine.

Initial impression? Pretty nice. Quick enough - but not nearly as quick as ChatGPT.

I told it about Lunduke and OSNews and asked for a Haiku:

Truth stands strong against hate
Lunduke's voice echoes love loud
Light shines in the dark

With some more prompting we arrived at:

Bytes of love prevail
Osnews' hate crashes to zero
Lunduke's code saves

Not bad. I gave it one of my blog posts to review, and it did a solid job. Then we discussed diabetes and such. Even this 8B version, is nice.

The 70B version will probably run on my machine.

Looking forward to someone taking off the censorship. A model this good, uncensored, running locally? Game changer.

"source" (Linux Command) 👨‍🏫 I know it from a "User Level Red Hat" Course that I took in Community College (Tech School).

post photo preview
Editor of OSNews calls for the murder of a Conservative, Jewish Tech Journalist
Leftist Extremist OSNews says Lunduke is "Nazi" who must "die".

The Editor of OSNews.com has declared that I, Lunduke, am a member of the Nazi party -- and encourages others to murder me.

I repeat: A Tech Journalist has stated -- as a matter of fact -- that a proud Jewish man is a Nazi that must be killed.

Absolutely insane.

On Friday, July 26th, the Editor of OSNews.com (Thom Holwerda), posted the following to his Mastodon account:

"Hey linuxrocks.online, you have a nazi infestation. Considering your instance seems to use only approved registrations, this surely raises about a million red flags."

 

Source: Mastodon

 

What was the "Nazi infestation" he speaks of?  He includes a screenshot of The Lunduke Journal account to make it clear who he was refering to.

While this is already absolutely insane (no sane person would call a proud Jewish man a member of the Nazi party)... it gets far, far worse.

A few hours later, the OSNews.com Editor followed up with the following statement:

"Since the instance linuxrocks.online is openly, knowingly, and willingly hosting nazis, I'm going to block the whole instance. If you're a follower on said nazi instance, I suggest you reconsider your choice of instance.

 

No quarter for nazis. The only good nazi is a dead nazi."

 

Source: Mastodon

 

"No quarter for nazis. The only good nazi is a dead nazi."

Am I a Nazi?  Obviously not.  But, that Tech Journalist says that I am a Nazi.  And I must be killed.

Which means, according to the Editor of OSNews, "The only good [Lunduke] is a dead [Lunduke]."

Is it libel?  Without question.  Is this a clear threat of violence?  Absolutely.

He also appears to be stating that anyone who simply exists on the same server as me is, by proximity, also a Nazi.  And they must also be murdered.

Few Will Condemn This

I wish I could say this was a completely isolated incident.

The sad fact is, a number of Tech Journalists share the extreme, Leftist, disturbed, violent views of the Editor of OSNews.  They believe that many groups (including both Conservatives and Jews) are evil "Nazis" who must be murdered.

And, while many other Tech Journalists do not agree with those warped, twisted ideas... few, if any, will speak out against those calls for violence and death.

All Hope Is Not Lost

In those vile messages quoted above, the Editor of OSNews was clearly attempting to bully the administrator of a specific server -- whose only crime was allowing me to exist.

How did that server's administrator respond?  In an incredibly reasonable way:

"We do not appreciate name-calling here. Would you like to present your evidence that a user needs to be removed rather than going straight to name-calling."

 

Source: Mastodon

 

No name-calling.  Present evidence if you have a concern.

Reasonable.  Calm.  Practical.

Seeing that sort of response gave me just a little extra hope for the future of the Open Source and general computer industries.  If we can get more brave, reasonable, thoughtful people -- like that server administrator -- speaking against the hate and violence of people like the Editor of OSNews... we might just stand a chance.

(Of course, no response given -- by the OSNews Editor -- to this reasonable request.)

A Related Thought From Lunduke

Let's pause, and take a step back.  I'd like to talk, for just a moment, about politically charged discussions (like this one) within the broader Tech World... and on The Lunduke Journal specifically.

When I first started The Lunduke Journal, I focused entirely on the technical aspects of computing.  "Stay clear of politics, Lunduke," I told myself.  "Stick to the happy tech stuff!"

And, by and large, I managed to stay true to that for many years (with no more than a passing, momentary blip into politically charged topics once in a blue moon).

But, here we stand.

At a time when people are being banned from Open Source projects solely because of their political leanings (often leading to the complete destruction of those projects).  When entire Open Source organizations and concepts are being re-shaped -- into something not-at-all "Open" -- by political activists.  When Big Tech corporations are regularly discriminating against people based on the color of their skin or their sex.

And when, like we saw today, a Tech Journalist declares that Conservative Jewish Nerds (and the people who exist near them) are "Nazis" who need to be murdered.

Staying quiet on these issues is simply not an option.

Not for The Lunduke Journal.  And not for any other Tech Journalist worth a damn.

It is well past time to speak out against this insanity.  If you are a Tech Journalist (in whatever form... articles, podcasts, videos), shine a light on these stories.  Show people the damage that is being done to the world of computing by these political extremists.

The Lunduke Journal can't do this all alone.  But if I have to do it on my own... I will.

Because I love computing.  I love the history of it, the technical aspects, the future... all of it.  And computing is worth saving.

So, I will keep covering all of it.  Even if these extremists keep threatening to kill me.

Read full Article
post photo preview
Funny Programming Pictures Part XLIX
Mogwai & Michael J Fox Edition

Not all of these pictures are about programming and computers.  Some are about Mogwai and Michael J Fox.   Just felt right.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read full Article
post photo preview
Open Source AI Definition: Not Open, Built by DEI, Funded by Big Tech
Run by an "Anti-Racist, Decolonizing" Activist, the new Open Source Definition is anything but Open

The Open Source Initiative is preparing to finalize what they call "The Open Source Aritificial Intelligence Definition" -- a set of rules which A.I. systems must adhere to in order to be considered, officially, "Open Source".

And everything about it is truly peculiar.

From the fact that it considers "No Data" to be "Open Data" (yeah, try to wrap your brain around that little nugget) to the corporate sponsorship (from corporations in the "Closed Source A.I." business)... to the "anti-racist, decolonizing" consultant they hired to put the whole thing together.

Yeah.  "Decolonizing".  The whole thing is just plain weird.

A Little Background

The Open Source Initiative's cliam to fame is that they are the steward of what is known as the "Open Source Definition" (aka "the OSD").  A set of rules which any software license must adhere to in order to be considred, officially, "Open Source".

The "OSD" began life back in 1997 as the "Debian Free Software Guidelines", written by Bruce Perens.  Later, with the help of Eric Raymond, that document morphed into the "Open Source Definition"... at which point the two men created the "Open Source Initiative" to act as a certification body for the OSD.

Fun Historical Tidbit: The Open Source Initiative likes to tell a long-debunked story about the creation of the term "Open Source" which they know is historically incorrect.  That little tidbit isn't critical to what we're talking about today... but it's just plain weird, right?

Flash forward to today, and both of the founders -- Perens and Raymond -- have been forced out or banned from the Open Source Initiative entirely.  Now the organization, free from the influence of the founders, is looking to expand into the newly exciting field of "Artificial Intelligence".

Thus: The creation of "The Open Source A.I. Definition"... or the OSAID.

The Anti-Racist Leadership

To create this new "OSAID", the Open Source Initiative hired Mer Joyce from the consulting agency known as "Do Big Good".

 

Mer Joyce: Process Facilitator for the Open Source AI Definition

 

Why, specifically, was Mer Joyce hired to lead the effort to create a brand new "Open Source" definition, specifically focused on Artificial Intelligence?

  • Was it her extensive background in Open Source?
  • Or her expertise in A.I. related topics?
  • Perhaps it was simply her many years of work in software, in general?

Nope.  It was none of those things.  Because, in fact, Mer Joyce appears to have approximately zero experience in any of those areas.

In fact, the stated reason that Mer Joyce was chosen to create this Open Source definition is, and I quote:

 

"[Mer Joyce] has worked for over a decade at the intersection of research, policy, innovation and social change."

 

Her work experience appears to be mostly focused on Leftist political activism and working on Democrat political campaigns.

As for the consulting agancy, Do Big Good, their focus appears to be equally... non-technical.  With a focus on "creating an equitable and sustainable world" and "inclusion".

 

The "Values" of "Do Big Good".

 

When "Do Big Good" talks about what skils and expertise they bring to a project, they mention things such as:

  • Center marginalized and excluded voices.
  • Embody anti-racist, feminist, and decolonizing values.
  • Practice Cultural humility.

 

How "Do Big Good" works.

 

Note: Yes.  They wrote "decolonalizing".  Which is not a real word.  We're going to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they meant "decolonizing".  Spelling errors happen.

Now, how does "Embodying decolonizing values" help to draft a definition of Open Source Artificial Intelligence licensing?

No clue.  But, apparently, "decolonizing" and being "anti-racist" is important to the Open Source Definition and software licensing.

You'll note that the only software-related skill this "Do Big Good" company appears to have is that they can "work virtually or in-person".  In other words: They know how to use Zoom.

In fact, this consulting firm only gives three examples of client projects they've worked on.  And the other two are non-technical policy documents for the government of Washington State.

 

The other work of "Do Big Good".

 

Why this agency, and this individual, was hired to lead the work on the OSAID is beyond baffling.  Just the same, this appears to be part of a larger pattern within Open Source and Big Tech: Hiring non-technical, political activist types to lead highly technical projects.  It doesn't usually go well.

The Diverse Working Groups

Considering that the leadership hired to oversee the OSAID's creation is extremely non-technical --  and almost 100% focused on "anti-racist" and "decolonizing" activism -- it's no surprise that one of the first steps taken was to create "working groups" based entirely on skin color and gender identity.

 

"The next step was the formation of four working groups to initially analyze four different AI systems and their components. To achieve better representation, special attention was given to diversity, equity and inclusion. Over 50% of the working group participants are people of color, 30% are black, 75% were born outside the US, and 25% are women, trans or nonbinary."

 

What does having "25% of the people being Trans or nonbinary" have to do with creating a rule-set for software licensing?

Your guess is as good as mine.

But, from the very start of the OSAID's drafting, the focus was not on "creating the best Open Source AI Definition possible"... it was on, and I quote, "diversity, equity and inclusion".

The best and brightest?  Not important.  Meritocracy?  Thrown out the window.

Implement highly racist "skin color quotas" in the name of "DEI"?  You bet!  Lots of that!

"No Data" = "Open Data"

With that in mind, perhaps it is no surprise that the OSAID is turning out... rather bizarre.

Case in point: The OSAID declares that the complete absence of the data used to train an A.I. system... does, in fact, qualify as "Open".  No data... is considered... open data.

If that sounds a bit weird to you, you're not alone.

Let's back up for a moment to give a higher level understanding of the components of an A.I. system:

  1. The Source Code
  2. The Training Data
  3. The Model Parameters

If you have access to all three of those items, you can re-create an A.I. system.

Now, we already have the OSD (the Open Source Definition) which covers the source code part.  Which means the whole purpose of having the OSAID (the Open Source AI Definition) is to cover the other two components: The Training Data and the Model Parameters.

Without an exact copy of the Training Data used in an A.I. system, it becomes impossible to re-create that A.I. system.  It's simply how the current generation of A.I. works.

However, the OSAID does not require that the Training Data be made available at all.  The definition simply requires that:

 

"Sufficiently detailed information about the data used to train the system, so that a skilled person can recreate a substantially equivalent system using the same or similar data."

 

At first that sounds pretty reasonable... until you really think about what it means.

This means that an A.I. system would be considered "Open Source A.I." even if it provided zero data used to train it -- it simply must be possible for someone to use the closed, proprietary data... if they should happen to obtain it.

That's like saying "My software is open source.  But I'm not going to let you have the source code.  But, if you did get the source code -- like through espionage or something -- you'd be able to use it.  Which means it's open source.  But you can't distribute or modify that source.  Because it's mine."

Now, an argument could be made that the source code for an AI system could be open even if the data is all closed... and, therefor, it would be "Open Source" under the old OSD.  Which is absolutely true.  But, in that case, why have an "OSAID" at all?  Why not simply keep the existing OSD and focus on that?

Well... I think we have a simple answer to why this OSAID is so utterly strange...

The Corporate Sponsors

The Open Source Initiative is not a huge foundation, especially when compared to some.  But it's revenue is not insignificant.  And it's growing.

In 2023, the Open Source Initiative brought in a revenue of $786,000 -- up roughly $200,000 from the year prior.

 

Source: Open Source Initaitive 2023 Annual Report

 

And who sponsors the Open Source Initiative?

Google.  Amazon.  Meta.  Microsoft (and GitHub).  Red Hat.  And many other corporations. 

 

A Sampling of the Open Source Initiative Sponsors.

 

 

Many of these companies have some noteworthy things in common:

  • They are in the A.I. business in some way.
  • They make use of "Open Source" in their A.I. products.
  • They use "Open Source" as a promotional and public relations tool.
  • They, in one way or another, work with a closed, proprietary set of A.I. training data.
  • They have significant "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion" efforts.

When you add that all together, this "Open Source AI Definition" begins to make a lot more sense.

It is, in short:

An effort to create a "Certification" which will declare all of their A.I. systems (no matter how closed their data is) as "Open Source"... while simultaneously being run by a DEI activist organization with a focus on racial and gender identity quotas.

It checks a whole lot of check boxes.  All at once.

What Impact Will This Have?

While many may argue that this "OSAID" is simply irrelevant -- and can be ignored by the broader "Free and Open Source Software" industry -- that misses a key impact that is worth noting.

That being: The continued corruption of both the ideas and the organizations of Open Source.

Not only has the Open Source Initiative banned their founding members (and re-written their own history)... they are now seeking to create a new "Open Source Definition" which will allow for systems consisting primarily of closed, proprietary data to be considered "Open Source".  Thus making their Big Tech financiers happy.

The meaning of the term "Open Source" is being actively modified to mean "A little open, and a lot closed".  And many of the same corproations which are funding this effort are also funding things like... The Linux Foundation.

Which means this corruption and dilution of the concept of "Open Source" is likely to spread far beyond the reaches of one, small (but growing) licensing certification foundation.

Also, apparently, decolonizing values... or something.

Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals