121–130 of 131 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, fair use means that you can copy the code without agreeing to any license. It doesn't matter what clause you add. That's the whole point of fair use.
Copying code that you don't own into your own project isn't fair use.
In any case that's not what Copilot does, unless you deliberately make it do that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you change your license to exclude this particular use, it's no longer Open Source (no restrictions on how it's used). If you change your license to forbid removing the license, then there's a good chance that it doesn't hold any legal power. Reason being that machine processing is allowed by copyright laws.
> If you change your license to forbid removing the license, then there's a good chance that it doesn't hold any legal power. But almost all licenses already do that, for example the MIT license says: > The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
I don't get what's wrong with Copilot being trained on GPL code. If I, a human, had learnt to code by reading GPL code, would that have rendered all the code I ever write GPL too? After all, all human-created content is transformative due to how our brains work. And AI isn't all that different from us in the way it learns.
Citation, as they say, is needed.
We have some vague ideas of how brains learn. We have some vague ideas of how GPT-3 works. They are not the same vague ideas. Is reality congruent? Nobody knows. There is certainly no existence proof of human- or gorilla- equivalency.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People keep getting this wrong. Your license is irrelevant. Copilot depends entirely on being exempt from copyright restrictions (under fair use doctrine), and you cannot restrict this with any license, because they're not using that license. The only way you can stop them using your code so is to not share it with anyone. If they find your code (even via a leak!), they can legally use it, if their fair use claim is…
Copilot being fair use is what Microsoft claims (obviously), not an established fact. There is no precedent for this claim. (Nitpick: Fair use isn't an exemption from copyright, it's a defense for violating copyright)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We tried to migrate to Gitea at my company, ~100 repositories with a bunch of mirrors, lots of CI, renovate-bot using the API, etc. It was a disaster. It was unusably slow (10+ seconds to load the list of pull requests, API calls to open a new pull request timing out after 60s) despite never using more than a tiny fraction of the resources of a 16-core server. We tried to engage with the community to find out the cau…
/* I know it's off-topic, but symptoms look very much like a DNS problem, or a firewall problem. */
We did some profiling and spent quite a bit of time looking at Gitea's source code, it was pretty clear in the end that it's just very very inefficient for large setups. It does an excessive amount of I/O on the Git repositories every time you load a page; there is some caching but not enough / not of the right things. We were really open to implementing fixes and submitting PRs but the community was so hostile that we just abandoned it.
It was overall an enormous waste of time and I can't recommend Gitea to anyone with a setup larger than a handful of small repositories.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
/* I know it's off-topic, but symptoms look very much like a DNS problem, or a firewall problem. */
A DNS or firewall problem that causes Gitea to intermittently spend 10+ seconds responding to requests, when running in a cluster alongside other containers that have no such problems? Can you describe a plausible mechanism for that? We did some profiling and spent quite a bit of time looking at Gitea's source code, it was pretty clear in the end that it's just very very inefficient for large setups. It does an exces…
I wonder how CodeBerg works though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People keep getting this wrong. Your license is irrelevant. Copilot depends entirely on being exempt from copyright restrictions (under fair use doctrine), and you cannot restrict this with any license, because they're not using that license. The only way you can stop them using your code so is to not share it with anyone. If they find your code (even via a leak!), they can legally use it, if their fair use claim is…
"if their fair use claim is correct" That clause is doing a lot of work here. You seem to be starting with an assumption that their claim is correct, but it's kind of a ridiculous assumption. Here are the usual categories of fair use, according to the US copyright office. "criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research" Which of these do you think describes Copilot? I say none. I also suspect…
As far as practical consequences are concerned: if their fair use claim is struck down, Copilot is dead, unequivocally, because the only kind of license they can satisfy is a public-domain-equivalent one, and there’s not all that much such code. This is why I said “depends entirely on”.
See also https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31849107 where I said much the same thing, and pointed out that any mentions of the GPL specifically are a red herring.
> Why Copilot was trained on FOSS code but not copyrighted Windows code, and whether the company can specify all the software licenses and copyright holders attached to code used in the training data set. Seems a case of "license respect for me but not for thee". Microsoft are just a string of companies changing their original promises when taking over smaller companies with proper values. See : Meta with Oculus not…
I don’t know. It might be a good idea for all of us that they didn’t use Windows code for the modeling…