Live data from Hacker News

Saying Goodbye to GitHub

ersei.net

401–410 of 450 posts

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will be difficult to claim fair use if training AI model is explicitly mentioned in the license, I think. Currently GPL says: > To "modify" a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of the work in a fashion requiring copyright permission, other than the making of an exact copy. The resulting work is called a "modified version" of the earlier work or a work "based on" the earlier work. > A "covered work" means…

> It will be difficult to claim fair use if training AI model is explicitly mentioned in the license, I think Fair use is a statutory right (codifying what courts had 0reviously found to be an aspect of Constitutional free expression rights limiting the copyright power) that limits the exclusive rights of copyright owners. It can't be reduced in scope by license terms, because it deals with what the owner has no righ…

I don't mean "implied license".

My impression, they claim the fair use only because there is no other ground for ML training on GPL code. The license only describes other uses of the code, so the first question is on what grounds Open AI uses the code at all. And the only thing OpenAI comes with is the fair use.

ML training does not fall under free expression or similar basic rights, I think. Only because it looks too restrictive to forbid scanning the code which is publicly available for people to read, and the license itself does not mention such use, the fair use may be considered as some kind of justification.

I, of course, can be mistaken. Especially that I didn't study this subject deeply.

Also, for authors who are against the ML training on their GPL code, it's better to prove it violates even the current GPL version, rather than just introduce a modification to the license. Because new license will only cover new code, while old versions are already available under the old license.

On the other hand, such an amendment to the license will not be harmful, even if later proven to be useless. And it will clearly state the copyright holder's position regarding the ML training, instead of some subtle reasoning we should apply currently.

Some people may want an opposite amendment to their license - ML training does not produce a "work based on the Program" and can be freely performed by anyone.

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Is there any Researcher who maintains that LLM models contain Reasoning and intent? That's the funny thing about the (in)famous OpenAI letter; the first sentence kind of does this: >AI systems with human-competitive intelligence can pose profound risks to society and humanity, as shown by extensive research[1] 'human-competitive intelligence' sounds like reasoning to me. What's even funnier is that [1] is the stocha…

> 'human-competitive intelligence' sounds like reasoning to me. Yes, and when AIs reach that level of intelligence, we can revisit the question. However, as long as LLMs will confidently try to explain to me why several footballs fit in an average coffee mug, I'd say we are still quite some way away from "human-competitive intelligence".

Yes, I fully agree with you! there's no reasoning or intelligence in modern LLMs, but the OpenAI open letter and recent comms strongly implies there is

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#403
post #33

> The code that was regurgitated by the model is marketed as "AI generated" and available for use for any project you want. Including proprietary ones. It's laundering open-source code. All of the decades of knowledge and uncountable hours of work is being, well, stolen. There is nothing being given back. Leaving GitHub wont change that, OpenAI is training its models on every bit of code they can have, sourcehut, cod…

> gitlab doesn't even compare in free features.

What features is GitLab missing? I don't know, I'm curious.

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you link to a politeness law on the books that you feel is oppressive?

On the books? I mean laws like "you shouldn't make money from OSS made by someone else". The context of this chat.

oh, so those things are what people call "opinions", which they are completely allowed to have, just as you have yours. They aren't oppressing you, they don't expose you to penalties, you can't get thrown in jail.

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#406
post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You never know if a snippet it created came from another project verbatim or not… unless you claim you know all of the code that exists?

Search tools are a thing. Grep, Google, Github, etc. But yes, exactly, you never know if a snippet came from another project or not, so let's not assume it did without some convincing evidence.

Why assume it didn't?

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#407

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.

I've done a little bit of helping with hiring and I always interject that it should be links to code forges.

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How honestly can you say that "emergent properties" are real if you haven't really seen the training data or you don't actually know how the thing works?. It stand's to reason that the bigger the model, the more likely you'll get an answer to a question you're looking for. Even the apparently "tricky questions". Even things like translating code from one coding language to another... Anyway, maybe we are ALL stochast…

Emergent properties are never "real". They just are and you can see them happening, but "underneath" it's nothing. Edit: I meant to say I don't need access to training. By experimenting with in/outputs you can get a basic picture. I don't need to see biological scans to say something about your personality either.

I think an important distinction here is to say that currently, you perceive them to be real. They aren't factually real things, at least not yet.

Judging someones personality is a subjective process, not an objective one.

Post reply on HN