121–130 of 160 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If a person can read it and learn from it, AI should be able to do the same.
There's a valid moral question here, in short: why? I care about helping other people. Helping some type of amoral entity that's usually controlled by another amoral for-profit entity: why would I help those?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not all models have Free weights and not all models that are Free can run on your hardware. Normally the "can't run on your hardware" is a little dubious, but given how insanely high the hardware requirements can get to run these I think it's meaningful here.
I'm still here to create a product/tool/script/solve something and not just to write code. If anything i do helps to make the ecosystem around me better i'm for it. And if you look at anything LLM right now, all the research happening, its not opensource doing the research. Its high paid google, ms, etc. people and academy replicates it fast for opensource. We already have a give and take on both sides. Without them,…
I assume you mean open weight rather than open source, but: https://ai.meta.com/research/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a valid moral question here, in short: why? I care about helping other people. Helping some type of amoral entity that's usually controlled by another amoral for-profit entity: why would I help those?
Then use a license that say your code can't be used to train AI models. Honestly I agree that in the current state of things, it's fair for them to train on public data as long as the license doesn't forbid it. I learned to code this way, so it makes sense to allow AIs to do the same, for now. If it's a problem, just use another license.
Who can say for sure which license is good in this new age?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a valid moral question here, in short: why? I care about helping other people. Helping some type of amoral entity that's usually controlled by another amoral for-profit entity: why would I help those?
Why would you call these entities amoral? Through vcs and pension funds they are owned exactly by the people you want to help.
Pension funds I'd kind of understand, on the other hand there is a huge generational conflict, the pensioners that rely on this in many places are actually the comparatively rich older people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They take publicly accessible code and learn to predict good token strings from it to solve related or unrelated problems. I am not convinced this is not morally right. What they are not doing, as far as I can tell, at least not intentionally, is just copying code and removing the license and attribution. Even if you don't see the AI output as legitimately "creative", it's certainly transforming and remixing existing…
They take code with a license that prohibits using it to create preprietary software and use it to create proprietary software. It’s not about money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If a person can read it and learn from it, AI should be able to do the same.
There's a valid moral question here, in short: why? I care about helping other people. Helping some type of amoral entity that's usually controlled by another amoral for-profit entity: why would I help those?
Why should I care if some 3rd party is the middleman that builds the system that performs the transformation? I put out my code so that people can use it. The existence of said 3rd party doesn't restrict that in the slightest, in fact it enhances the reusability of my work which seems like a win-win.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would you call these entities amoral? Through vcs and pension funds they are owned exactly by the people you want to help.
VCs?!? :-))) Pension funds I'd kind of understand, on the other hand there is a huge generational conflict, the pensioners that rely on this in many places are actually the comparatively rich older people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’ve been feeling more and more that we should reconsider open source licenses to protect our rights as authors from LLM vendors. I’m not against them basing their models on my work. I do have reservations on them generating their models on my work and creating derivative works without respecting the license. It’s why I’ve started to use the MIT license less and less and have adopted various from the GPL family. Mode…
The license in your repo is entirely meaningless when you grant an exclusive license to places like GitLab and GitHub to "display" your code.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Soft serve is lighter still. https://github.com/charmbracelet/soft-serve
not sure how lightweight any of these are, but https://gitolite.com/gitolite/ just needs git and ssh deployed. And it works like a charm.
The lack of anonymous public access is often a deal-breaker though.
Back to self hosting my code. Side note: Gitlab is one of the few companies to provide a self hosted version of their VCS. https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/install/requirements.html Also gitea is a much more lightweight option and can use sqlite for db. Much easier to deploy on a rpi
I am of the school of thought that you should be using multiple remotes anyways. I don't think there is a good reason not to. Codeburg and, as another mentioned, Sourcehut may be good places to host your code in addition to your self hosted remote. Radicle[0] is also a really interesting option. [0] https://radicle.xyz/