Stephen Downes

This is an interesting question that could probably have received a more thorough treatment than it receives here. Some of the qualities are uncontroversial - they describe AI that is green, error-free, open source, based on consent, etc. But what about things like governance? Anil Dash writes, "Alternative creation, ownership and governance models for AI tools that address the corporate chaos of today's big names are well past due." That's what existed before, when AI was a research exercise, and as soon as there was money to be made (at least in theory) it went corporate. Why wouldn't these same stewards do the same thing again?