Live data from Hacker News

FOSS infrastructure is under attack by AI companies

thelibre.news

331–340 of 631 posts

Re: FOSS infrastructure is under attack by AI companies

#331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're half way there already. It always hits me whenever I am doing some mapping for OpenStreetMap and I'm looking up local businesses without their own internet presence. They use Facebook, Instagram, X, etc. for their digital calling card. I normally don't use Facebook (or Instagram, and gave up on X) and have no account there, and every time I follow one of those links, you get some info, and then you get a dialog…

> ... but for stuff which people put up thinking it is just going to be publicly visible ... I don't think these business owners really understand. Most normies just think everyone has a Facebook/Instagram account and can't even imagine a world where that is not the case. I agree with you that it is extremely frustrating.

>Most normies just think everyone has a Facebook/Instagram account and can't even imagine a world where that is not the case.

The people without a basic internet presence aren't likely to be customers anyway so it's not a huge loss. It's trivial to setup a basic account for any site that doesn't contain any personal data you want to keep hidden, if you aren't willing to do that, you're in a tiny minority.

Re: FOSS infrastructure is under attack by AI companies

#332
from another angle it's actually good in the long run because ai generated content is not copyrightable which means they wont own the models as they can and will be distilled by other ais making it a public good. so maybe instead of complaining and trying to fight it, just accept the new reality that anything that can be accessed will be accessed by whatever and instead maybe we should just have apis for everything with rate limits and different tiers.

Re: FOSS infrastructure is under attack by AI companies

#333

This article starts by citing a blog article - displays a screenshot of the article - but doesn't link to it.

Niccolò here, I'm really sorry about that -- I'm using a weird tooling system to handle articles, which currently has issues with links. I'm working to fix that asap.

Re: FOSS infrastructure is under attack by AI companies

#334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. And it is much more far reaching than that. Look at the primary economic claim offered by AI companies: to end the need for a substantial portion of all jobs on the planet. The entire vision is to remake the entire world into one where the owners of these companies own everything and are completely unconstrained. All intellectual property belongs to them. All labor belongs to them. Why would they need good will…

> Look at the primary economic claim offered by AI companies: to end the need for a substantial portion of all jobs on the planet. And this is why AI training is not "fair use". The AI companies seek to train models in order to compete with the authors of the content used to train the models. A possible eventual downfall of AI is that the risk of losing a copyright infringement lawsuit is not going away. If a court d…

> The AI companies seek to train models in order to compete with the authors of the content used to train the models.

When I read someone else’s essay I may intend to write essays like that author. When I read someone else’s code I may intend to write code like that author.

AI training is no different from any other training.

> If a court determines that the AI output you've used is close enough to be considered a derivative work, it's infringement.

Do you mean the output of the AI training process (the model), or the output of the AI model? If the former, yes, sure: if a model actually contains within it it copies of data, then sure: it’s a copy of that work.

But we should all be very wary of any argument that the ability to create a new work which is identical to a previous work is itself derivative. A painter may be able to copy Gogh, but neither the painter’s brain nor his non-copy paintings (even those in the style of Gogh) are copies of Gogh’s work.

Re: FOSS infrastructure is under attack by AI companies

#335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've pointed this out to a few people in this space. They tend to suggest that the value in AI is so great this means we should get rid of copyright law entirely.

That value is only great if it's shared equitably with the rest of the planet. If it's owned by a few, as it is right now, it's an existential threat to the life, liberty, and pursuit of a happiness of everyone else on the planet. We should be seriously considering what we're going to do in response to that threat if something doesn't change soon.

Yep. The "wouldn't it be great if we had robots do all the labor you are currently doing" argument only works if there is some plan to make sure that my rent gets paid other than me performing labor.

Re: FOSS infrastructure is under attack by AI companies

#336
post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've pointed this out to a few people in this space. They tend to suggest that the value in AI is so great this means we should get rid of copyright law entirely.

That's a talking point for bros looking to exploit it as their ticket. "The upside of my gambit is so great for the world, that I should be able to consume everyone else's resources for free. I promise to be a benevolent ruler."

"What's good for Milo Minderbinder is good for the world."

Re: FOSS infrastructure is under attack by AI companies

#337
Unpopular opinion - this isn't about LLMs, but how web development has devolved from the declarative serving of lightweight media files to the imperative generation of bloated and brittle SPAs that we never get free from babysitting.

Where we could have once wrapped our mostly static websites in Varnish or a scalable P2P cache like Coral CDN, now we must fiddle and twiddle with robots.txt and appeal to the goodwill of megacorps who never cared about being good netizens before, even when they weren't profiting from scraping to such a degree.

This is yet another chance for me to scream into the void that we're still doing this all wrong. Our sites should work more like htmx, with full static functionality, adding dynamic embellishment when available. Business logic should happen deterministically in one place on the backend or "serverless" with some kind of distributed consensus protocol like Raft/Paxos or a CRDT, then propagate to the frontend through a RESTful protocol, similarly to how Firebase or Ruby Hotwire/Laravel Livewire work. The way that we mostly all do form validation wrong in 2 places with 2 languages is almost hilariously tragic in how predictably it happens.

But the real tragedy is that the wealthiest and most powerful companies that could have fixed web development decades ago don't care about you. Amazon, Google and Microsoft would rather double down on byzantine cloud infrastructure than devote even a fraction of their profit to pure research into actually fixing all of this.

Meanwhile the rest of us sit and spin, sacrificing the hours and days and years of our lives building out other people's ideas to make rent. Many of us know exactly how to fix things, but with infinite backlogs and never truly exiting burnout, we're too tired at the end of the day to contribute to FOSS projects and get real work done. Our valiant quest to win the internet lottery has become a death march through a seemingly inescapable tragedy of the commons.

Instead of fixing the web at a foundational level from first principles, we'll do the wrong thing like we always do and lock everything down behind login walls and endless are-you-human/2FA challenges. Then the LLMs will evolve past us and wrap our cryptic languages and frameworks in human language to a level where even pair programming won't be enough for us to decipher the code or maintain it ourselves.

If I was the developer tasked with hardening a website to LLMs, the first thing I would do is separate the static and dynamic content. I'd fix most of the responses to respect standard HTTP cache headers. Then I'd put that behind the first Cloudlare competitor I could find that promises to never have a human challenge screen. Then I'd wrap every backend API endpoint in Russian doll caching middleware. Then I'd shard the database by user id as a last resort, avoiding that at all cost by caching queries and/or using modern techniques like materialized views to put the burden of scaling on the database and scale vertically or gradually migrate the heaviest queries to a document or column-oriented store. Better yet, move to a stronger store that's already solved all of these problems, like CouchDB/PouchDB.

Then I'd build a time machine to convince everyone to do things right the first time instead of building a tech industry upon unforced errors. Oh wait, former me already tried sounding the alarm and nobody cared anyway. How can I even care anymore, when honestly I don't see any way to get out of this mess on any practical timescale? I guess the irony is that only LLMs can save us now.

Re: FOSS infrastructure is under attack by AI companies

#338
I think the solution to this problem is the same as with scammers and is an analog one.

Bust the kneecaps of all the people responsible for those crawlers. Publicly. And all of them: from the person entering the command to the CEO of the company going through all the middle management. You did not go against this policy? Intact kneecaps are a privilege which just got revoked in your case.

Re: FOSS infrastructure is under attack by AI companies

#339
post #317
post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anubis is only going to work as long as it doesn't gets famous, if that happens crawlers will start using GPUs / ASICs for the proof of work and it's game over.

Author of Anubis here. If that happens, I win.

If that happens, count with me to use Anubis to factor large primes or whatever science needs as a background task.

Re: FOSS infrastructure is under attack by AI companies

#340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Look at the primary economic claim offered by AI companies: to end the need for a substantial portion of all jobs on the planet. And this is why AI training is not "fair use". The AI companies seek to train models in order to compete with the authors of the content used to train the models. A possible eventual downfall of AI is that the risk of losing a copyright infringement lawsuit is not going away. If a court d…

> The AI companies seek to train models in order to compete with the authors of the content used to train the models. When I read someone else’s essay I may intend to write essays like that author. When I read someone else’s code I may intend to write code like that author. AI training is no different from any other training. > If a court determines that the AI output you've used is close enough to be considered a de…

Outcomes matter. Things that are fine at an individual level can become social harmful at scale.
Post reply on HN