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

Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

app.dealroom.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 397 posts

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#121

Post by dan_q »

tokioyoyo wrote: post #109
jknoepfler wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, their internal PRs have the same problem, but they are pushing an AI narrative from the c-suite and can hide the reality of their private code bases. The "limited ROI on AI investment" articles will continue to percolate slowly into the brains of the LinkedIn hive-mind until we hit a tipping point, and then we'll finally shut up about how a handy dev tool with some decent use-cases is the dawning of the singulari…

Out of curiosity, do you use frontier AI dev tools on a daily basis professionally?

Let me guess: AGI is 2-6 weeks away, software development is solved, and anyone who disagrees with your enlightened perspective is a backwards-looking luddite.

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#122

Post by cesarb »

mbrumlow wrote: post #35

Policies like this will result in the death of the branded software. As we move forward it will be easier than ever to just maintain and keep your fork of software with the changes you want or need. No more approval, bureaucracy, or arguing. Just tell the AI agent want you want changed and you have it. This will be used for huge things too. Like maybe you want a specific fork of Java that only supports for each itera…

> maintain and keep your fork of software with the changes you want or need

Then you'll have the same problem everyone who forks a piece of software ends up having, sooner or later: as the original evolves, keeping your fork up to date with the upstream changes becomes harder and harder. The bigger and more invasive the changes are, the harder synchronizing with newer releases become.

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#123

Post by mrkstu »

slopinthebag wrote: post #9

I would laugh for a week if the courts eventually found issues with using LLM content and forced companies to either publish their LLM generated code as public domain or they were forced to roll back their codebases to a pre-LLM state. Probably won’t happen but clearly Oracle sees a potential for legal issues with LLM output.

Thing is public domain can be used any way you want. The Libre style licenses are specifically engineered to make the source available to the users of the source, no such clause exists in using public domain.

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#125

Post by ux266478 »

NoDodgeQuestion wrote: post #87
ux266478 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's even more pervasive than that. Why bother forking software at all? At the point in which code generation is meaningfully trivialized, software becomes entirely disposable. Anything you want, have a model spin it up. You don't even need libraries, the model can just make everything in-situ, who cares? Why on earth would I ever want to use SQLite if I have access to a sufficiently advanced code generator w…

>Why on earth would I ever want to use SQLite if I have access to a sufficiently advanced code generator which can generate me a similarly high quality database system https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_qzqY1bb7I your sufficiently advanced code generator may generate you a high quality database system for some measure of quality, but it will not have SQLite's reliability over the extremely long tail of edge cases prov…

Then you've failed the criteria of sufficiently advanced. It's perfectly fine to cast doubt we'll see scaling to this generalization, but you're not casting doubt you're outright rejecting the premise in-confidence. It betrays that you have no idea what you're talking about. May I see your quantification of this long tail? Do you even know how to formalize the mapping from n-bit precision of weights and/or activations to the standard deviation of a transformer's output distribution, such that we could decide whether the long tail of a given behavior is unreachable? Something tells me that no, you don't know how to do that in the slightest. So what drives you to speak with such confidence?

That's before we get into the entire non-linearity of agentic systems introducing massive decidability problems on this in the first place. A little bit of epistemic humility please.

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#126

Post by cyanydeez »

TimTheTinker wrote: post #118
victorbjorklund wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not even a conspiracy theory. Just the most likely explanation.

"Do not fall into the trap of anthropomorphizing Larry Ellison. You need to think of Larry Ellison the way you think of a lawnmower. You don't anthropomorphize your lawnmower, the lawnmower just mows the lawn - you stick your hand in there and it'll chop it off, the end. You don't think 'oh, the lawnmower hates me' - lawnmower doesn't give a * about you, the lawnmower can't hate you. Don't anthropomorphize the lawnmo…

more and more it seems like he's referring to billionaires more or less.

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#127

Post by nemomarx »

asdfman123 wrote: post #75
cautiouscat wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ghostty has what I’d consider to be a reasonable policy. You submit what you want to change and how, explain it in your own words. A trusted member can vouch for you. You can then make a PR, but you need to explain the solution and how it works in your own words. I’m sure someone could still just prompt their way through but it’s a decent soft gate IMO.

Really, I think the long term solution is people's attitudes need to catch up with the technology. Humans still need to review code for taste, making sure AI is writing sensible, well organized output. That's a core "AI skill" for now, at least until it gets better...

If ai rapidly gets better, then instead of submitting prs you can ask your agent to fork and improve the project and bypass the policy that way. if it goes slower they have time to reconsider policies in the future. if it doesn't improve then we can probably find out some middle ground approach like the ghostty one

in any of those cases there's no reason to get swamped by cheap PRs for now

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#128

Post by dofm »

This is the firm whose debt is one level above junk and whose survival as a single unbroken corporate entity is fully predicated on OpenAI being able to make money from the data centres they (Oracle) are building for them, let alone simply paying for them.

I accept @jerf's explanation is the right one but this is an absolutely almighty signal that AI-first developers should heed. And someone should ask Altman about it on the record.

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#129

Post by hobo123 »

TimTheTinker wrote: post #118
victorbjorklund wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not even a conspiracy theory. Just the most likely explanation.

"Do not fall into the trap of anthropomorphizing Larry Ellison. You need to think of Larry Ellison the way you think of a lawnmower. You don't anthropomorphize your lawnmower, the lawnmower just mows the lawn - you stick your hand in there and it'll chop it off, the end. You don't think 'oh, the lawnmower hates me' - lawnmower doesn't give a * about you, the lawnmower can't hate you. Don't anthropomorphize the lawnmo…

What about a guy with a lawnmower intentionally chopping off your foot? And what about a CEO making decisions on behalf of the corporate entity called Oracle?

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#130

Post by burnte »

TimTheTinker wrote: post #118
victorbjorklund wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not even a conspiracy theory. Just the most likely explanation.

"Do not fall into the trap of anthropomorphizing Larry Ellison. You need to think of Larry Ellison the way you think of a lawnmower. You don't anthropomorphize your lawnmower, the lawnmower just mows the lawn - you stick your hand in there and it'll chop it off, the end. You don't think 'oh, the lawnmower hates me' - lawnmower doesn't give a * about you, the lawnmower can't hate you. Don't anthropomorphize the lawnmo…

The flaw in the analogy is that oracle is made of people. It's not a lawnmower, it's a group of people with human motivations and human thoughts. It's true they don't HATE people, but it's also true they absolutely have no conscience in negotiations and have zero concern about relationships.
Post reply on HN