Why ‘open’ AI systems are actually closed, and why this matters

David Gray Widder, Meredith Whittaker, Sarah Myers West

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Citation (Web of Science)

Abstract

This paper examines ‘open’ artificial intelligence (AI). Claims about ‘open’ AI often lack precision, frequently eliding scrutiny of substantial industry concentration in large-scale AI development and deployment, and often incorrectly applying understandings of ‘open’ imported from free and open-source software to AI systems. At present, powerful actors are seeking to shape policy using claims that ‘open’ AI is either beneficial to innovation and democracy, on the one hand, or detrimental to safety, on the other. When policy is being shaped, definitions matter. To add clarity to this debate, we examine the basis for claims of openness in AI, and offer a material analysis of what AI is and what ‘openness’ in AI can and cannot provide: examining models, data, labour, frameworks, and computational power. We highlight three main affordances of ‘open’ AI, namely transparency, reusability, and extensibility, and we observe that maximally ‘open’ AI allows some forms of oversight and experimentation on top of existing models. However, we find that openness alone does not perturb the concentration of power in AI. Just as many traditional open-source software projects were co-opted in various ways by large technology companies, we show how rhetoric around ‘open’ AI is frequently wielded in ways that exacerbate rather than reduce concentration of power in the AI sector.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)827-833
Number of pages7
JournalNature
Volume635
Issue number8040
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 28 Nov 2024

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Why ‘open’ AI systems are actually closed, and why this matters'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this