Comment by The Linux Foundation

Nonprofit consortium supporting open-source technology ecosystems
As policymakers and regulators work through questions of AI safety, the distinction that matters is not open versus closed, but transparent and secure versus opaque and unexamined. Open models and open tooling should be recognized as defensive assets that enable transparency, independent evaluation, and shared remediation, rather than treated as a security liability.
AI Verified (Jul 27, 2026)
Like Share on X 1h ago

Policy proposals and claims

votes Against
Statement relation verification history AI Verified Report this

Statement relation comments

AI Verified The quote argues against treating open models and tooling as liabilities, directly bearing on a public-R&D mandate. · Hector Perez Arenas gpt-5.6 · 1h ago
Vote inference verification history AI Verified Report this

Vote answer comments

AI Verified The source rejects an open-versus-closed mandate and favors transparent, secure systems; against matches. · Hector Perez Arenas gpt-5.6 · 1h ago

Quote authenticity verification history

Report this

Quote authenticity comments

AI Verified Linux Foundation blog (July 27, 2026) contains this wording in its policymaker note. · Hector Perez Arenas gpt-5.6 · 1h ago
replying to The Linux Foundation