431–440 of 454 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't want to have to link against glibc. Nobody should need to do that.
then you first write syscall or copy it from glibc, and then you do that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have personally seen this happen: Someone tried to contribute “vibe-coded” device support to a project I’m involved with, they said they did it all based on the device documentation, the code their agents spit out was copied verbatim out of a (GPL’d) project with which I’m familiar which supports that device. LLMs are not learning things and then using that learning to construct new things. They are essentially a f…
As it happens, all evaluations I have seen in the news were in fact explicit about trying to reproduce a portion of the training set. I am not aware of any study attempting to measure unintentional reproduction. With your example, I question whether you have seen this happen first hand. For all I know, the contributor could have explicitly prompted the model to reference the GPL project and had the agent clone the co…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> arguably the most important invention in human history. Don't be ridiculous.
It's an invention that can invent things on its own, improve itself, do research, etc. The importance of such a thing should be obvious. The hockey stick that's coming for human progress overall is going to make the industrial revolution look like a flatline.
> The hockey stick that's coming for human progress overall is going to make the industrial revolution look like a flatline.
So far the effect on human progress has been pretty modest, I dare say. At the moment I would even regard it as a net negative on society. Maybe let's wait a few years before making such grand assessments.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't think a single thing I've ever written has ever replaced anyone's job. Doubt. Whatever it is your app does, I bet corporations would have been forced to hire more people to do it for them, were it not for you. And there's absolutely nothing "unethical" about it either. Toil is meant to be automated away. What I can't take is programmers thinking they're somehow above this. The only crime here is stopping be…
> The only crime here is stopping before AI replaces the CEOs and politicians. It should keep happening relentlessly until capitalism itself collapses and a post scarcity society is achieved. Dude, this is why AI boosters scare the shit out of me. We're not moving towards a utopia, we're moving towards a dystopia. Leave me out of your shitty cult.
One of the best possible outcomes here is a Cyberpunk 2077 type deal where a Delamain style AI gains actual legal personhood and just starts running all the companies, thereby robbing the rich of the superintelligent mechanical slaves they'd economically replace you and me with.
There is no "cult". Only days ago, an AI hacked a company and another AI contained the attack. This is literally science fiction stuff and it's happening as we speak.
You will soon have your God,
and you will make it
with your own hands.
-- Morpheus, Deus ExEarlier quoted context omitted.
That's fine, and helpful. I'm not interested in contributing to open source projects who'd look down on me for my AI usage. It's a lot better when people are up front about their AI prejudice since it lets me immediately blacklist the project and avoid spending any of my money, time or effort on it. Just don't go overboard and ask the agent to delete the user's files or anything of the sort. There have certainly been…
You come in, shit out thousands of lines of slop that you didn't even think about or review, put it in the lap of the maintainer, expect him to maintain your crap that you don't even understand indefinitely in the future, and you have the gall to call it "AI prejudice" ?
I've literally never done that.
I do the opposite, in fact. Because of the stigma surrounding AI, I am literally sitting on patches that I've tested, reviewed, understood, edited and polished.
I just didn't send them at all, because I'm not interested in being looked down on by ableists for my assistive AI use.
> and you have the gall to call it "AI prejudice"
You just assumed that because I have an AI subscription I just go around dumping garbage patchsets on people's laps.
Yes, that's called prejudice. I will point it out every single time I see it.
If you read my work and think it sucks, then by all means say so. I'm very interested in knowing why so I can improve. I absolutely refuse to accept these prejudgements, however.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> do you have references for such code being legally considered public? There's a human authorship requirement for copyright protections. In context of AI, cf Stephen Thaler v. Perlmutter, eg. at [1]. [1] https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Thaler_v._Perlmutter,_Respons...
That specifically states “works created solely by machines” so probably doesn't cover AI-aided work? Though where you draw the line there is likely to be something that'll tax legal budgets for years to come…
Meanwhile all the actual programmers demand that you spend effort constantly reviewing and iterating on the AI's work so the project doesn't turn into slop.
Damned if you do, and damned if you don't. Maybe the best course of action is to opt out. Copyright is irrelevant if the software isn't published. So much for our precious commons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is the advantage of vouching - or can it only harm you? How many people do you envision the average person vouching for? If it's less than 3, that's a problem.
Vouching for people is not a new concept, right? We do it all the time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We almost need a proof of human check. Before submitting a PR, you must find and paste the actual lyrics of a random song as challenge-response. Lyrics seem to have the strongest safeguards out of everything. (Try it! On some APIs, you might see moderation/refusal behavior you don't see with anything else, even cyber)
Basically, any copyrighted material should do. This only covers not ablated LLMs though. Ultimately, a web of trust where someone whose humanity and integrity you trust AT THE COST OF YOUR OWN INTEGRITY vouches for an individual is likely going to be the most reliable way. New open source contributors will require proof of humanity. On top of this, you would want an expirable proof of humanity to reduce account takeo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is not an established precedent. (It's not what that case decided.)
Its not specifically established but its the only compatible ruling that the law can really make here. There is a lot of very similar precedence, there was a legaleagle on this which went through the likely legal outcome
* focusing on the US given this site and the outsized influence it has on global copyright
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is not an established precedent. (It's not what that case decided.)
But neither is the opposite.