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

Cessation of public development of Kefir C compiler

kefir.protopopov.lv

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 142 posts

Re: Cessation of public development of Kefir C compiler

#41

Post by xigoi »

bjourne wrote: post #13

People taking your work and not giving anything back was ALWAYS the risk you took when writing free software. LLM training doesn't change that much. That the us military no doubt is using gcc to compile embedded software for their icbm:s no doubt irks the gnu people. But you can't have it any other way. "You can only use my software for good things" just is not consistent with "free software".

Before LLMs, you could use the GNU GPL or other copyleft licenses to protect your code from being used to develop non-free software. Unfortunately, the courts have decided that LLMs are free to ignore licenses.

Re: Cessation of public development of Kefir C compiler

#43

Post by Gormo »

account42 wrote: post #18
kator wrote: post #3

> Yet, this shift made me re-evaluate the open source code publishing. Prior to that, I have been positive about free and open software, and considered this to be the default mode for work such as kefir. I did not require any justifications from myself to publish something. Now, however, I feel more and more that the main beneficiaries of my unpaid work are companies scraping the internet to train large language mode…

This is essentially the digital world transforming from a high trust society into a low trust one. Sad to see.

To whom would you attribute the greater part of that reduction in trust: the people using FOSS to train LLMs, or the people trying to block them?

Re: Cessation of public development of Kefir C compiler

#44

Post by xigoi »

Gormo wrote: post #40
bjourne wrote: post #13

People taking your work and not giving anything back was ALWAYS the risk you took when writing free software. LLM training doesn't change that much. That the us military no doubt is using gcc to compile embedded software for their icbm:s no doubt irks the gnu people. But you can't have it any other way. "You can only use my software for good things" just is not consistent with "free software".

Yeah, I really can't comprehend these sentiments as anything other than an "I don't like AI" argument. FOSS has always been about just writing code and putting it out into the world where others can do as they please with it. I see a lot of risks involved in people surrendering their own decision-making to LLMs, but that's a question of how they're used, not how they're trained. The idea that using FOSS software to t…

> FOSS has always been about just writing code and putting it out into the world where others can do as they please with it.

Not true. Most FOSS licenses require attribution and many require derivatives to be released under the same license.

Re: Cessation of public development of Kefir C compiler

#45

Post by Gormo »

xigoi wrote: post #44
Gormo wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I really can't comprehend these sentiments as anything other than an "I don't like AI" argument. FOSS has always been about just writing code and putting it out into the world where others can do as they please with it. I see a lot of risks involved in people surrendering their own decision-making to LLMs, but that's a question of how they're used, not how they're trained. The idea that using FOSS software to t…

> FOSS has always been about just writing code and putting it out into the world where others can do as they please with it. Not true. Most FOSS licenses require attribution and many require derivatives to be released under the same license.

Sure, but I guess I'm not seeing the relevance here. Are we seeing some greater-than-normal wave of people redistributing FOSS code without attribution, or creating derivative works without adhering to the license terms? LLM training doesn't seem to be either of these things.

Re: Cessation of public development of Kefir C compiler

#46

Post by f6v »

rgoulter wrote: post #9

Seems to me LLMs have changed some things. I'm not sure how it's best put, but it used to be: - Seeing code (or a blogpost or whatever) was a result from effort where thought had gone into it. The writer paid effort so the reader didn't have to. - There'd be some level of attachment to what you've put effort into. With LLMs, that's undermined: it's easy to produce thoughtless imitations. Code or comments where though…

I don't know... I've been writing code for good twenty years (15 professionally).

First, I think it's the best time to write software since so much boring stuff can be automated. I can put my thoughts into what I'm trying to achieve instead of how. To put it otherwise, I think about big picture much more than about mundane details like dealing with particularities of a programming language.

Second, most people were using SO to solve just about any issue they had. The number of developers producing truly original code was minimal even 10 years ago.

Re: Cessation of public development of Kefir C compiler

#47

Post by buran77 »

irdc wrote: post #15
malwrar wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really hate to say it, but I’ve stopped publishing my work too for this reason. I spend most of my time now building my own little software ark, and I aspire to no longer think of programming in the next few years. I feel like the creative economy in general will be unrecognizable in the near future, maybe nonexistent. I wonder what modes of collaboration on ideas might form in the next few years.

Here is what the purveyors of AI don't seem to realise. You can bend copyright law all you want in order to train your models on whatever you can grab, but in the absence of genuine protection of their creative work authors are simply not going to be publishing at all .

I think they see it all too well. They still think they can make bank today while it lasts, whatever comes after is some other shareholder's problem. And if we're talking about open source, killing it might be a positive side effect, they'll be ready to sell you a closed source alternative when you no longer have options.

Re: Cessation of public development of Kefir C compiler

#48

Post by oooyay »

account42 wrote: post #18
kator wrote: post #3

> Yet, this shift made me re-evaluate the open source code publishing. Prior to that, I have been positive about free and open software, and considered this to be the default mode for work such as kefir. I did not require any justifications from myself to publish something. Now, however, I feel more and more that the main beneficiaries of my unpaid work are companies scraping the internet to train large language mode…

This is essentially the digital world transforming from a high trust society into a low trust one. Sad to see.

Not even just digital; much of the world is shifting from high trust to low trust as well: https://social.desa.un.org/sites/default/files/inline-files/...

Re: Cessation of public development of Kefir C compiler

#49

Post by Xirdus »

Gormo wrote: post #43
account42 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is essentially the digital world transforming from a high trust society into a low trust one. Sad to see.

To whom would you attribute the greater part of that reduction in trust: the people using FOSS to train LLMs, or the people trying to block them?

People who break the social contract are the ones responsible for breaking the social contract, not the ones who take steps in response to social contract being broken.

Re: Cessation of public development of Kefir C compiler

#50

Post by lesostep »

buran77 wrote: post #47
irdc wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is what the purveyors of AI don't seem to realise. You can bend copyright law all you want in order to train your models on whatever you can grab, but in the absence of genuine protection of their creative work authors are simply not going to be publishing at all .

I think they see it all too well. They still think they can make bank today while it lasts, whatever comes after is some other shareholder's problem. And if we're talking about open source, killing it might be a positive side effect, they'll be ready to sell you a closed source alternative when you no longer have options.

Furthermore, if people not only stop publishing, but also take down already published works, it will create a moat around already existing Language Models

And the more they DDOS small websites — instead of respectfully scraping once — the more realistic my conspiracy theory looks.

Post reply on HN