GPT-OSS is OpenAI’s “open-weight” model (which does not mean open source).

While the world is focused on the release of GPT 5, the almost simultaneous publication of GPT-OSS has gone virtually unnoticed. This is an “open” model with 120 billion parameters that can also run locally on older machines. It is censored but, above all, it is designed to resist jailbreaking by Andrea Monti Initially published in Italian by Italian Tech – La Repubblica Continue reading “GPT-OSS is OpenAI’s “open-weight” model (which does not mean open source).”

Webscraping and AI Datasets: if the purpose is in the public interest there is no copyright infringement

“The creation of a dataset … which can form the basis for the training of artificial intelligence systems, can certainly be considered scientific research … Although the creation of the dataset as such may not be immediately associated with an increase in knowledge, it constitutes an essential step for the goal of using it to subsequently acquire the knowledge in question ’ – by Andrea Monti – originally published in Strategikon – Italian Tech-La Repubblica
Continue reading “Webscraping and AI Datasets: if the purpose is in the public interest there is no copyright infringement”

AI (non-)copyright. A US ruling apparently sets the record straight, but negatively affects content-creators

Last August 18, 2023, a ruling of US District Court for the District of Columbia in the Civil Action No. 22-1564 (BAH) denied copyright protection to an image generated with an AI in execution of the input (‘prompt’) of the user. At a first glance the ruling looks correct, however it is questionable because there are are many examples of copyrighted non-AI- generated content made without human intervention. The main problem with this ruling, indeed, is that it looks at the matter from the (wrong) perspective of the ‘AI subjectivity’ rather than the economic value of the final product by Andrea Monti – initially published in Italian on Strategikon – an Italian Tech Blog Continue reading “AI (non-)copyright. A US ruling apparently sets the record straight, but negatively affects content-creators”