Hi, On Sun, 2025-04-27 at 18:47 +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote: > My concern for Japanese keyboard input method was addressed in > "ToxicCandy Allowlist" by assessing it as non-AI model in ML-policy.
Could we stop using terms like "toxic" or "cancerous" or whatever in technical discussions? (Unless we talk about toxic products or cancer treatment or similar.) > The current policy proposal is vague at what is not "AI models" and > it lacks direct reference to "ToxicCandy Allowlist".  (Why missing? > or did I overlook something?) The GR proposal does not talk about this, but the notes in the proposal explicitly state: | Note: While nowadays people use "AI" to refer to LLMs, it is a very broad term | that covers much more than language models. AI models apart from language | models must be considered as well, such as computer vision models, audio | recognition models, etc. So the intent seems to be a broad interpretation of what AI means, so probably including models for input methods built from other source data. Ansgar >
