The only thing that's really a problem I see is if you're trying to build a business around developing opensource. Even then, it's better to publish non-core pieces of it so that many eyes can use and hopefully improve the security or fix bugs/holes in it.
Ask HN: Do you think differently about working on open source these days?
61–63 of 63 posts
Re: Ask HN: Do you think differently about working on open source these days?
#62Yes. I always licensed my projects under GPL variants. That contract was broken by LLM vendors. So now I'm taking my toys and going home. All my new projects are hosted on Sourcehut. I trust Drew when he says they are not letting LLM bots have at it. Its not just the dev either. I'm no longer posting any content on blogs. Almost all of my other online interactions have moved to private channels and closed forums. I'm…
Re: Ask HN: Do you think differently about working on open source these days?
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think GPL licenses really stop companies from scraping the code and using it to train their LLM's. Also, how would you prove they actually used your code ?
I strongly agree. LLM’s have eviscerated the core idea and motivation behind using the GPL, in a way I didn’t at all see coming. We’ve published a lot of very unique GPL code (eg in sagemath), which anybody can now easily “regenerate” as part of some other closed (or open) software using an LLM. They wouldn’t even know they are creating a derived work of our GPL code. I have had to come to terms with this...
I don't think this is as clear as you say it is. If a person "regenerates" GPL code from memory, it will still be a copyright violation. LLMs can't own copyright on their own, so a person must be responsible for the result. So it should be a violation. GPL should help (if you actually sue).