In this case semantics do matter so to keep the improvements in the Software Commons as Commons. Weak / Permissive licenses will ensure that all the voluntarily contributed labour would be enclosed and profitable only to those who can hire an army of engineers. Strong licenses will ensure your call for a free exchange.
Depends. Overly open licenses can also motivate prevent people to not share things. Case in point here is some of the openai stuff where they shared enough so people can replicate their results but without giving away everything. People have been complaining that that's not open enough. But it's still better than them not sharing anything at all. That model certainly seems to be working well for them.
Compare that with e.g. companies in China or elsewhere that are also working on AI that are perhaps sharing a bit less. That's a bit of a black hole in terms of information going in but not coming out. I think the more open people can get the better. But even some weaker licenses are better than nothing.
Things are open enough currently for people to independently replicate each other's results. I think that's the important bit.
