Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Saying Goodbye to GitHub

ersei.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 450 posts

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#41

Post by bruce511 »

japhyr wrote: post #21
bruce511 wrote: post #11

I'm gonna get hated on for this, but I don't think "give back" is an open source concept. I'm not aware of any Open Source license,or Free license for that matter,that has a give-back clause. Source code is available to -users- ,not prior-authors. Some Open Source licenses can be used in proprietary code, (MIT, BSD etc) with little more than simple attribution. Those developers chose that license for a reason, and I'…

No need to hate on you for a valid response. I think we're in a new enough situation that we can look beyond what's legal in a license. When many of us started working on open source projects, AI was a far-off concept. Speaking for myself, I thought we'd see steady improvement in code-completion tools, but I didn't think I'd see anything like GPT-4 in my lifetime. Licenses were written for humans working with code. W…

I agree that AI usage of code is somewhat murky with current licenses,which obviously don't mention it either way.

Free software has a principle of "freedom to run, to do whatever you wish" (freedom 0), so arguably has said that training AI is OK. (We could quibble over the word Run, but the Gnu.org,and RMS clearly say "freedom 0 does not restrict how you use it."

GPL code can be used by the military to develop nuclear weapons. Given that the is a guiding principle of the FSF its hard to argue that the current usage is not OK.

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#42

Post by slg »

bruce511 wrote: post #11

I'm gonna get hated on for this, but I don't think "give back" is an open source concept. I'm not aware of any Open Source license,or Free license for that matter,that has a give-back clause. Source code is available to -users- ,not prior-authors. Some Open Source licenses can be used in proprietary code, (MIT, BSD etc) with little more than simple attribution. Those developers chose that license for a reason, and I'…

If we are being honest as a community, open source developer are pretty far down the list of groups with valid grievances against this current wave of AI for how they are trained. There is at least a debatable case that these systems are operating in the spirit if not the exact letter of general open source licenses. It is a much harder argument to make for the AI trained on writing and art that is clearly copyrighted. If you have ethical questions about Copilot, you really should be against this entire crop of AI systems.

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#43

Post by alpaca128 »

bottlepalm wrote: post #14

Is there really anything ‘unique’ about the code we write on a line or even function level? It all feels like plumbing to me. It’s how you put it all together that makes what you create with it unique and special. Copilot so far has generally just figured out what I was going to type next anyways without it, nothing mind blowing, but super helpful.

While I don't think MS has the right to just ignore copyright I think this is closer to the idea of code reuse than previous approaches where someone had to choose a specific level of granularity and abstraction and hope the result can be effectively used without any change.

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#44

Post by jacooper »

bigpeopleareold wrote: post #38

You don't give up GitHub as long as you're employed in many companies that have accepted it and are looking for information on pretty much most open source software these days. The only thing is to just host your own projects elsewhere. I did this a long time ago because I was unhappy over GitHub's interface. I am realizing further that all I need is a web page and a link on my personal web site. If I really wanted t…

I have heard from some people that many companies specifically ask for your github profile, in many places only the user tag, not a link which can be changed to gitlab or something else.

So it will effect your job chances, even if the job has nothing to do with managing GitHub.

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#45

Post by pcthrowaway »

ethbr0 wrote: post #16
jacquesm wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are really not going to care about what you put into your license file, they are just going to claim that the use of GitHub binds you to their terms of service and that this supersedes your own license. Good luck fighting that.

ToS doesn't supercede copyright though, does it? The real rub will be the first court precedent on whether GPTs infringe on source data IP. Could see it going either way: fundamentally transformative or not.

You agree to Microsoft's ToS before you can put any code on Github, regardless of the license.

You can't opt-out of those terms, regardless of your license, just as you can't opt out of Facebooks terms which give them the right to use your content for their business or marketing purposes, even if the various chain posts that have spread there might claim otherwise.

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#46

Post by EMIRELADERO »

aetherspawn wrote: post #31
Aaron2222 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't they claiming that it's fair use? IANAL, but wouldn't that make the licence irrelevant if training AI/ML models was found to be fair use? And if not, it's a licence violation anyway?

IANAL either, but the license still applies to the end-user (the person who trained the AI) so it would seem like it would add at least 1 non-trivial license violation for that user? Edit: I googled "fair use copyright US" and have now decided that US copyright law is stupid.

> Edit: I googled "fair use copyright US" and have now decided that US copyright law is stupid.

Don't be like that. Fair use is what allowed VCRs to continue existing, what allows Google Images and Books to exist, what allows the development of emulators... I could go on.

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#47

Post by senko »

"When I was young I found X. It was wonderful and full of stars! As I grew up, things changed, but I stayed with X because I was used to it. Finally, Y happened and I have to leave X because I really dislike Y. Goodbye! (ps. I'm not actually leaving because I want to be involved with things that are still going on there, but I want it to be known I don't really like X anymore)"

Replace X with GitHub, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Usenet, IRC, ... this is an archetypal growing up and facing change in the world story.

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#48

Post by pcthrowaway »

autophagian wrote: post #39
kookamamie wrote: post #34

> It's a stochastic parrot Stopped reading right there. The author clearly has no clue of how neural networks work or what makes them tick.

Do you have any resources you'd recommend to form a better understanding of how NNs tick? I'd like to get a better intuitive grasp on whats going on - I've mostly just been responding to that with "Well, if stochastic parrotism can do all this..."

At this point, anyone using the term "stochastic parrot" is just giving credence to my personal belief that humans are also stochastic parrots.

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#49

Post by swyx »

npinsker wrote: post #19
alex_suzuki wrote: post #2

While I agree with the general observation of the article, the tone and wording feels needlessly harsh and subjective. Sentences like „I could go to GitLab, but they have their own fair share of issues and a disgusting UI/UX.“ really diminish the article and by association, also the author.

I appreciated the specific word choice there; 'disgusting' implies a strong, visceral reaction, as if to say GitLab's work is so far from the author's taste that it blocks them from considering the product, and didn't seem all that harsh if that's how the author actually feels. In a counterintuitive way, it was nice to read -- it says that UI is important; that it shouldn't be an afterthought; that it has the power t…

what is so bad about the UI/UX? i'm not a frequent gitlab user but it doesnt strike me as anything out of the ordinary

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#50

Post by rob74 »

bruce511 wrote: post #11

I'm gonna get hated on for this, but I don't think "give back" is an open source concept. I'm not aware of any Open Source license,or Free license for that matter,that has a give-back clause. Source code is available to -users- ,not prior-authors. Some Open Source licenses can be used in proprietary code, (MIT, BSD etc) with little more than simple attribution. Those developers chose that license for a reason, and I'…

You're allowed to make money from Free/OSS code, and plenty of companies have (Google, Amazon etc.), but they have always also at least given back something to the community to earn some good will. The situation with AI is new because it not only doesn't give anything back, it actually takes something away by threatening developers' jobs etc.
Post reply on HN