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

Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

alexispurslane.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 611 posts

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#571

Post by jodrellblank »

akerl_ wrote: post #570
jodrellblank wrote: post #566

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're not talking about someone who "just happens to be within earshot" of something that is inside your private garden and not open to the public. If you put a note on the public noticeboard saying "I have planted some things in this area of the public commons and I am the maintainer them" can you defend the idea that you are not voluntarily offering to maintain something?

Yes.

Go on then, which part of my earlier post do you disagree with, specifically?

1. The difference between ‘abandoned’ and ‘maintained’ is that ‘maintained’ is bounded at the lower end to a greater-than-zero amount of maintenance work. Not a specific amount but necessarily >0. (Without that, “maintained” and “abandoned” become the same thing and that’s absurd).

2. “I am the maintainer” can be a voluntary statement, it’s not compelled (e.g. by a gun to the head).

3. The role of ‘maintainer’ is ‘doing that >0 amount of maintenance work’.

?

By the time we’re arguing how much maintenance, you’re agreeing with my position. In the case of your garden, if I saw it on fire I would think it reasonable to contact you about the fire given you are the gardener. I wouldn’t contact someone who was not the gardener.

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#572

Post by tptacek »

jodrellblank wrote: post #559
tptacek wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would I need to? Nobody volunteered . In the analogy, you found something on a shelf somewhere and decided to depend on it. The person who put it on the shelf never agreed to support you in that endeavor.

“This is abandonware” And “This is maintained and I am the maintainer” Are different states. 'Maintenance' is not work-free or effortless, so the second sentence is explicitly volunteering to do some non-zero amount of work, right? I don't see how it can be read any other way, you either have to argue that maintenance isn't work, or that "I am the maintainer" is not volunteering oneself into the role of doing that wo…

No, it is not.

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#573

Post by akerl_ »

jodrellblank wrote: post #571
akerl_ wrote: post #570

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes.

Go on then, which part of my earlier post do you disagree with, specifically? 1. The difference between ‘abandoned’ and ‘maintained’ is that ‘maintained’ is bounded at the lower end to a greater-than-zero amount of maintenance work. Not a specific amount but necessarily >0. (Without that, “maintained” and “abandoned” become the same thing and that’s absurd). 2. “I am the maintainer” can be a voluntary statement, it’s…

Oh, you asked me if I disagreed with your point about gardens.

That one is pretty obvious because community gardens that want to enforce a floor on amount of maintenance include that in rules that you have to agree to before they give you some of their space.

I checked the whole terms of service for GitHub and they don’t have anything about how much work I have to do on a repo once I publish it for it to stay mine.

If you’re asking me which of those statements I disagree with, 1 and 3.

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#574

Post by rickydroll »

noddybear wrote: post #563
rickydroll wrote: post #551

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If corporations can be people, there is no reason why AI can't be considered a person.

Nobody human considers a corporation to be a person. It is merely a legal expedient.

I used to think that until I did a little digging into it. Specifically, corporations are considered legal persons because they are separate legal entities, thereby creating a wall between your personal affairs and your business. It protects your personal assets from any liabilities, debts, or lawsuits.

Also, since it's a separate entity, its lifetime is not tied to the owner. So if the owner dies, their shares are inherited by somebody else, and the company keeps operating.

It helps in raising money for business operations. A corporation raises capital by issuing and selling shares of stock. However, if a physical person did that, I think it would be called indentured servitude.

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#576

Post by rickydroll »

anamax wrote: post #575
rickydroll wrote: post #551

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If corporations can be people, there is no reason why AI can't be considered a person.

Corporations are aggregations of people. Are AIs?

A corporation is a separate entity. They hire people to work for them, but any liabilities incurred by the Corporation are rarely passed through to the workers. If you pay attention, it's more likely for a worker to go to jail or be held responsible for a screw-up by the legal system than one of the suits at the top.

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#577

Post by pie_flavor »

ch_fr wrote: post #558
pie_flavor wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone spouts untruths, that is a failing of theirs. Talking about how there's emotions of theirs that back this promulgation of untruths, emotions which you could understand if you tried, is putting the cart before the horse. First express things that are not trivially false, then I will try to understand what you mean by it.

You keep trying to twist what I'm saying into "guys you have to be nice to the ai haters and meet them at the middle, even when they insult you :))))". Once again you have this kneejerk reaction to the words "emotions" and "feelings" as if it would make you weak to acknowledge that "humans feeling a certain way act a certain way". I'll once again have to remind you that all of what I said was just "yeah these guys ar…

I don't think any of this relates to the post it's replying to. I appreciate the totally failed attempt to psychoanalyze my emotions, though. If you think I'm 'confused, surprised, and angry', you don't seem to be as good at the emotions thing as you keep acting like you are.

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#578

Post by eschaton »

Leynos wrote: post #485
eschaton wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Don’t get mad at people for doing something unethical or immoral, or they’ll do something unethical or immoral!” Disabling attribution of LLM-generated code is fraud, because you’re saying you wrote the code. Of course that fits right in with the use of an LLM to generate code in the first place, since what it’s actually doing is regurgitating its inputs stripped of any license and copyright notice.

Outside of situations where it is required by contract, attributing AI usage is a courtesy, nothing more.

So it’s OK to just paste other people’s IP into a change you’re submitting to a project without caring about the license or originator?

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#579

Post by eschaton »

UebVar wrote: post #490
eschaton wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is misrepresentation for gain, that gain does not need to be monetary to be material. For example, it can be reputational. It also is copyright infringement, because what the LLM “generates” are actually portions of its training set, which were covered by copyright. Just passing through an LLM does not remove that copyright from that work.

No, you are wrong. In German and French (roman) legal systems this is a "Vermögensdelikt", and explicitly about material damage and gain. Yes, common law can be more broad (in canada it isn't really, it just also includes service, btw.), and yet it clearly does not meet the definition, as there is a damaged/defraued party and fraudulent/gaining party. We are not talking about somebody usurping somebody else reputatio…

No, you are wrong. You are either willfully misunderstanding what I’m calling fraud, or you are misinformed as to what “material gain” means in many legal systems.

With respect to the former, “fraud” is a shorthand for “fraudulent misrepresentation,” which is what you’re doing when you take someone else’s IP and try to contribute it to a project without securing the right to do so. It can be read as implicit in the attempt to contribute to the project that you have secured this permission (or do not need to, because the work is original to you). Whether the code came out of an LLM or was copied from another project or Stack Overflow doesn’t matter, it’s that you’re misrepresenting the rights you have that’s the fraudulent part.

For the latter, I specifically pointed out that the gain from fraudulent misrepresentation need not be monetary. The gain can be reputational or any other sort of benefit. For example, someone pretending to a fictional person to gain access to a space they otherwise wouldn’t is still committing fraud.

Finally, you’re wrong about whether the output of an LLM infringes copyright of material in its training set. Just running a copyrighted work through an LLM does not remove the copyright on that work if reproduced by the LLM.

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#580

Post by jodrellblank »

tptacek wrote: post #572
jodrellblank wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“This is abandonware” And “This is maintained and I am the maintainer” Are different states. 'Maintenance' is not work-free or effortless, so the second sentence is explicitly volunteering to do some non-zero amount of work, right? I don't see how it can be read any other way, you either have to argue that maintenance isn't work, or that "I am the maintainer" is not volunteering oneself into the role of doing that wo…

No, it is not.

No, what is not what?

What I'm getting from you and akerl_10 is "la la la I don't want words to have meanings so I'm just going to deny that they do".

Post reply on HN