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

AI-powered open-source code laundering

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 93 posts

Re: AI-powered open-source code laundering

#61

Post by 48terry »

arthurofbabylon wrote: post #13

If we step back and examine LLMs more broadly (beyond our personal use cases, beyond "economic impact", beyond the underlying computer science) what we are largely looking at is an emerging means of collaboration. I am not an expert computer scientist, and yet I can "collaborate" (I almost feel bad using this term) with expert computer scientists when my LLM helps me design my particular algorithm. I am not an expert…

Me copying and pasting your post verbatim to put on my blog under my name: "I greatly enjoyed collaborating with arthurofbabylon on this piece."

Re: AI-powered open-source code laundering

#62

Post by ares623 »

hu3 wrote: post #18
alganet wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You forgot to mention that if things continue as they are, a very small group of people will have complete control over this giant library.

It's a concern. But there are open source models.

Are you able to build these models from source?

Re: AI-powered open-source code laundering

#63

Post by ares623 »

o11c wrote: post #4
CuriouslyC wrote: post #3

Sorry to say but this is going to be the new normal, and it's going to be quite difficult to stop. Your moat as a creator is your personal brand and the community you build around your tools.

I just hope that means we're all allowed to feed leaked source code to our own AIs then. This is mandatory if we're to have any sort of coherent legal precedent.

Game crackers can just claim they generated a completely different game using AI that just so happens to look very close to another game?

Re: AI-powered open-source code laundering

#64

Post by CuriouslyC »

throwaway290 wrote: post #5
CuriouslyC wrote: post #3

Sorry to say but this is going to be the new normal, and it's going to be quite difficult to stop. Your moat as a creator is your personal brand and the community you build around your tools.

this is a blatant try to normalize. "Bad people do unethical things, I guess we'll have to live with it and shut up" is the vibe the author is going good. it's not a new normal until everybody goes quiet

This is a very bad faith comment from a throwaway account.

Recognition of realities is different from wishing for things to occur. If you think you can stop unethical people from AI washing your software, feel free to try, you will fail.

Re: AI-powered open-source code laundering

#65

Post by dvfjsdhgfv »

userbinator wrote: post #6

Hopefully the spread of AI will make more people realise that everything is a derivative work. If it wasn't an AI, it was a human standing on the shoulders of giants.

This is a very intriguing statement because it looks like it contains a truism but something is off. Yes, everything is a derivative work of some kind, what matters is the amount of added value - if it gets close to 0 as in this case, we've got bare plagiarism.

[As a side note, the problem with LLMs (sorry, the term "AI" became so muddy I prefer not to use it) is that they tend to be extremely uncreative and just average to mean. So I wouldn't expect added value in creativity itself, just helping humans with more menial tasks just like antirez is doing.]

Re: AI-powered open-source code laundering

#66

Post by chrisldgk »

charcircuit wrote: post #21
smj-edison wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, this is where I find the copyright argument a little weak. Because how do artisans learn their craft? By observing others' work. Instead, I feel like the objections are (rightly) these two issues: 1. GenAI operates at a much larger scale than an individual artist. I don't think artists would have an issue with someone commissioning a portrait say in the style Van Gogh (copyright argument). They would have an is…

>Lack of giving back I disagree. There is a ton of free AI generated text, code, images, and video available for completely free for people to learn from.

Which is just laundered from real material that real humans put work in to create, only to be regurgitated by a krass homonculous of 1s and 0s for free without any mention of the real work that has been put into creating that information.

I’m not a big fan of the copyright system we have myself, but there’s a reason it exists. AI companies illegally training their AI on copyrighted content to reap the spoils of the hard work of other people that never get recognition for their work is the opposite of „giving back“.

Re: AI-powered open-source code laundering

#67

Post by CuriouslyC »

ares623 wrote: post #63
o11c wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just hope that means we're all allowed to feed leaked source code to our own AIs then. This is mandatory if we're to have any sort of coherent legal precedent.

Game crackers can just claim they generated a completely different game using AI that just so happens to look very close to another game?

They could copy the core game mechanics and have AI launder the source and generate new art assets. Proving infringement is going to be basically impossible for all but the most trivial of cases.

Re: AI-powered open-source code laundering

#68

Post by throwaway290 »

pessimizer wrote: post #17
throwaway290 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this is a blatant try to normalize. "Bad people do unethical things, I guess we'll have to live with it and shut up" is the vibe the author is going good. it's not a new normal until everybody goes quiet

> this is a blatant try to normalize. This doesn't mean anything. You have no ability to "normalize" anything. It's not an action that somebody can take. > it's not a new normal until everybody goes quiet Real let me speak to your manager energy. Nobody is waiting for you to go quiet to get on with things.

> You have no ability to "normalize" anything.

You can if you convince everyone to stop making a fuss because it's the new normal. The comment literally said "it's the new normal".

Re: AI-powered open-source code laundering

#69

Post by throwaway290 »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #64
throwaway290 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this is a blatant try to normalize. "Bad people do unethical things, I guess we'll have to live with it and shut up" is the vibe the author is going good. it's not a new normal until everybody goes quiet

This is a very bad faith comment from a throwaway account. Recognition of realities is different from wishing for things to occur. If you think you can stop unethical people from AI washing your software, feel free to try, you will fail.

Bad faith = trying to normalize bad faith behavior.

> If you think you can stop unethical people from AI washing your software, feel free to try, you will fail.

Posts like these = trying to stop unethical people from copyright (copyleft) washing. Telling people writing these posts that it's the new normal is basically saying they are doing pointless thing, while they are doing something very good

Re: AI-powered open-source code laundering

#70

Post by monero-xmr »

ares623 wrote: post #58
monero-xmr wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nearly every European university offers a degree in Tourism. The difference is regarding debt. But socializing the cost of a degree in tourism does not mean the cost isn’t born by society. I believe deep in my bones that one can learn the ropes of managing a hotel outside the illustrious grounds of a university

Tbh it just sounds like you don’t value others and others’ work that isn’t a “hard” field. Sure people can learn hotel management outside of university. But outside of nepotism who will trust random strangers with no qualifications to get their foot in the door? And you make it sound like socializing the cost of improving outcomes for the next generations as a negative. What is the point if society if not that? Even…

“Tourism studies” isn’t a field. It’s not an academic discipline. Requiring someone to spend years “studying” this is completely absurd. The reality is university is finishing school, and young adults desire 4 years of screwing around while officially getting a degree, and society subsidies it.

You have missed my point entirely. These degrees have no value. I would argue they have negative value when factoring in their cost in resources and wasted time

Post reply on HN