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

Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

fablepool.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 301 posts

Re: Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

#211

Post by plq »

8note wrote: post #73
bensyverson wrote: post #18

This idea reads like a joke, but there's something to it. One feature request: In addition to high-level milestones, it would be cool if a partially-funded project would generate a public, highly detailed implementation plan. Also, IANAL but MIT is still a license with a copyright holder. I don't think saying "it's MIT, we all own it" is defensible. The courts might view all this code as public domain.

if fable is writing it, courts my declare that its not even public domain? not a copywrightable work

I don't get this. No I did not write that code but I paid money to eg. Anthropic to buy that code. To me it sounds like I own it just the same.

Re: Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

#212

Post by DonHopkins »

LastTrain wrote: post #95
pitched wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of AWS is built on open-source. This is obviously ignoring hardware costs. I don’t know if it is all that ridiculous anymore. These models are very good at wiring together open-source systems. The world is crazy right now…

You, my friend, have drunk from the goblet of koolaid.

Careful dude, that's not a goblet of koolaid, it's a bottle of Amazon Delivery Driver Urine!!!

Re: Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

#213

Post by DonHopkins »

ceejayoz wrote: post #195
andrewstuart2 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wondered if it was intentional, but thought I would double down on it in case people missed it. Was the dashless domain really a site (or the site) at one point?

It was dashless for many years.

As dashless and pointed as https://penisland.net/ !

Re: Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

#214

Post by 47282847 »

plq wrote: post #211
8note wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if fable is writing it, courts my declare that its not even public domain? not a copywrightable work

I don't get this. No I did not write that code but I paid money to eg. Anthropic to buy that code. To me it sounds like I own it just the same.

Ownership is not the same as authorship. Copyright is about authors rights, not owners.

If you buy a text of me, I cannot sign away my authorship, and there’s certain limitations on what you can do with my text regardless of contract.

Re: Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

#215

Post by 47282847 »

plq wrote: post #211
8note wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if fable is writing it, courts my declare that its not even public domain? not a copywrightable work

I don't get this. No I did not write that code but I paid money to eg. Anthropic to buy that code. To me it sounds like I own it just the same.

Ownership is not the same as authorship. Copyright is about authors rights, not owners.

If you buy a text of me, I cannot sign away my authorship, and there’s certain limitations on what you can do with my text regardless of contract. I can only sell you usage rights - which may or may not be exclusive. If the text I wrote is trivial, neither you nor me can limit when it is reproduced. The effort of collecting data is not sufficient, if the data itself is declared trivial. See rulings about phone books.

When an AI provider produces data that is deemed not copyrightable, it cannot legally sell you exclusive usage rights. It can give it to you exclusively, but since you cannot yourself claim copyright, the moment you publish it it becomes available for others to use as well. One may argue that an LLM is similar to a phone book, with its entries being “trivial“ and its composition not artistic enough.

At least that’s the line of argument.

Re: Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

#216

Post by fragmede »

weird-eye-issue wrote: post #165
fragmede wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

shit, that was the quickest $23 I went and bought a a domain name for.

Interesting way to waste $23

Some people have a drinking budget, I have a domain name budget. A couple years back, my friends threw a domain name transfer party, like a secret Santa where you got to surprise someone with a domain name you got for them.

Re: Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

#217

Post by wongarsu »

plq wrote: post #211
8note wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if fable is writing it, courts my declare that its not even public domain? not a copywrightable work

I don't get this. No I did not write that code but I paid money to eg. Anthropic to buy that code. To me it sounds like I own it just the same.

"I paid money to someone to write that code" is exactly the line of argument that would lead to no copyright. There was the famous monkey selfie court case in 2015 that ruled that at least in the US, monkeys can't hold copyright. The same arguments would apply to AI. And since the AI can't create copyrighted works on its own, it can't assign copyright for works it created for hire either

The other line of argument is the "Claude Code is to coding like a photo camera is to painting". The image is generated automatically, but the input in how you point the camera is enough to still make it a creative work protected by copyright. Under that interpretation, you are not hiring AI, you are using it like a tool

The US Copyright Office holds the former opinion. I'm sure once this goes to court, lots of companies will vehemently argue the latter. I would not be surprised if we even end up changing the law over this

Re: Show HN: FablePool – pool money behind a prompt, and Fable builds it in public

#218

Post by aaron695 »

bensyverson wrote: post #18

This idea reads like a joke, but there's something to it. One feature request: In addition to high-level milestones, it would be cool if a partially-funded project would generate a public, highly detailed implementation plan. Also, IANAL but MIT is still a license with a copyright holder. I don't think saying "it's MIT, we all own it" is defensible. The courts might view all this code as public domain.

[dead]
Post reply on HN