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

YC criticized for backing AI startup that simply cloned another AI startup

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 276 posts

Re: YC criticized for backing AI startup that simply cloned another AI startup

#51

Post by wheels »

llm_trw wrote: post #24
billy99k wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the can of worms here now shifts to piracy. Whenever it comes up, a large percentage of people here on HN support it. "you wouldn't have purchased it anyway", "the original authors don't lose anything". The same can be said about using the Apache license and the service here in question. In fact, the difference is that it's completely legal. The original authors don't lose anything.

Not sure what piracy has to do with this. The point is that you've specifically let people do something then when they do it you're upset they did it. If you don't want them to do it, don't explicitly allow them to do it. There are plenty of licenses which would have stopped this.

I voted the grandparent up about the license allowing it. But things being allowed isn't a benchmark for them being decent.

I don't think we should stone adulterers. But I also think cheating on your partner can mean you're an asshole.

Re: YC criticized for backing AI startup that simply cloned another AI startup

#52

Post by sgarland »

billy99k wrote: post #15
richbell wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not sure why people are so upset about it. 1. It reflects poorly on YC. 2. Something can be legal without being moral or ethical.

1. I disagree 2. How is it not ethical or moral? As stated above, you are allowed to resell software based on the Apache license and integrate it into a service. The original authors haven't lost anything.

If you get a traffic ticket, you can pay a lawyer to get it knocked down to a non-moving violation, thus saving your insurance rates from spiking. This is 100% legal, but is it ethical? The other poor saps in the court haven’t lost anything, it’s not zero-sum. And yet, it somehow feels dirty to be able to wash your hands of a crime by dint of having money.

Re: YC criticized for backing AI startup that simply cloned another AI startup

#53

Post by cynicalpeace »

MeetingsBrowser wrote: post #41
cynicalpeace wrote: post #30

These guys are gonna get a ton of business because of this publicity. Any press is good press.

Developer tooling, especially AI powered, has historically not been the most forgiving industry.

Good point, but they can always pivot, since they're obviously good at marketing. Seems YC made a good choice

Re: YC criticized for backing AI startup that simply cloned another AI startup

#54

Post by llm_trw »

prnak120 wrote: post #40
llm_trw wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a conversation I keep having with people who support permissive licenses. >Oh no, you're allowed to do whatever you want, but you shouldn't. >>Then why is Amazon allowed to do it if they shouldn't? >It's not polite. >>...

It is not that simple. Very few licenses are accepted by, e.g., Linux distributions. If you create your own modified license, for example BSD with two additional clauses that prohibit use for AI training and use in startups without significant modifications then no one will use it. That is the reason why people are forced to release under the extremely permissive licenses and hope for moral behavior by their users. T…

> [...] no one will use it.

> That is the reason why people are forced to release under the extremely permissive licenses and hope for moral behavior by their users.

No one is forcing you to release source code under permissive licenses. You're literally saying that you're doing it because you want more users. Congratulations on your imaginary internet points.

Meanwhile Bezos is very much making non-imaginary money off your work.

Re: YC criticized for backing AI startup that simply cloned another AI startup

#56

Post by wpietri »

gyre007 wrote: post #25
hbbio wrote: post #11

The worst part is that instead of backing out and let's say kicking them out of the batch, YC doubled down praising the (pretty poor imho) justification that may also have been written by ChatGPT, like the license :) https://x.com/mwseibel/status/1840846817631879291

I don’t thinks its the worst , but it did feel in bad taste. YC have put money and trust in them, so why would they kick them down? Would you? They haven’t committed any crime so why would they distance themselves (Note: I am not a YC founder or affiliated with YC in any way)

Is your standard for ethics really, "Well it's not a criminal violation of the law?"

Re: YC criticized for backing AI startup that simply cloned another AI startup

#58

Post by llm_trw »

wheels wrote: post #51
llm_trw wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure what piracy has to do with this. The point is that you've specifically let people do something then when they do it you're upset they did it. If you don't want them to do it, don't explicitly allow them to do it. There are plenty of licenses which would have stopped this.

I voted the grandparent up about the license allowing it. But things being allowed isn't a benchmark for them being decent. I don't think we should stone adulterers. But I also think cheating on your partner can mean you're an asshole.

> Corporations have neither bodies to be punished, nor souls to be condemned, they therefore do as they like.

-- Edward Thurlow

Re: YC criticized for backing AI startup that simply cloned another AI startup

#59

Post by wpietri »

llm_trw wrote: post #14
jazz9k wrote: post #2

This is completely allowed under the apache open source license. I'm not sure why people are so upset about it. If you don't want this to happen, release software under a different licensing model.

This is a conversation I keep having with people who support permissive licenses. >Oh no, you're allowed to do whatever you want, but you shouldn't. >>Then why is Amazon allowed to do it if they shouldn't? >It's not polite. >>...

And I think those conversations are worth listening to. Do we want a society where people release a lot of open-source code? Or do we want one where people get tired of doing free labor for greedy jerks, and so stop releasing things openly?

Civilization runs on politeness and other things that flow not from our current laws but from respect for others. We ignore that at our peril.

Re: YC criticized for backing AI startup that simply cloned another AI startup

#60

Post by syedkarim »

diggan wrote: post #32
paxys wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but there's a difference between a VC investing a billion dollars in one startup and one investing $100K each in a thousand of them. In the first case they will obviously do a ton of due diligence, go over business plans, get board seats, look at code and more. YC on the other hand has a 10-minute chat with the founder and...that's it. The earlier you invest, the larger the risk and looser the diligence.

> Yes but there's a difference between a VC investing a billion dollars in one startup and one investing $100K each in a thousand of them. Isn't that just the difference between "seed funding" and "Series-A/B/C/$letter" funding? In the former, you want small amounts spread across as many parties as possible, while in the "Series" funding you do higher amounts but more concentrated, as you have more data to invest mor…

Which part of it do you think is not true? The written application is not extensive at all. It takes maybe 1-hour of focused time. That’s all I had ever spent on the written part of the application and I’ve been interviewed three times as a solo founder. And the interview really is just ten minutes long, though sometimes they go a little over the limit.
Post reply on HN