Earlier quoted context omitted.
This "theft" is not a new argument, and its always been run by people who have a vested interest in killing open-source or who aren't part of it. In 2001 I had a guy at Oracle tell me it was a suckers game to write open source code. I've had M$ heads tell me ruby was a joke that would never amount to much because you couldn't use it in a "real business". I've had bad phil bros tell me in 2004 that open source was "an…
The argument is not just "theft", and to the extent that "theft" is a part of it, it is not the most important part, not by large margin. The reason that "theft" is not a solid argument, is because people creating open-source often distribute it for free themselves. Piracy is not the issue. The issue is that all attributions get stripped away by the LLM (even in cases where it is trivial to avoid). For example, as a…
At least with the old school web search engines, you got a hyperlink that you could use to find out more. Now the only way to learn more is to keep asking the LLM more questions. There is no way to get from the LLM to a source outside the LLM.