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

191–200 of 398 posts

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#191

Post by xxs »

ActorNightly wrote: post #138
mcdow wrote: post #48

y’all seem to be missing the fact that Java is a mature product. it has left the “move fast and break things” era of it’s development. code is a liability, and they likely have more to lose than gain by allowing AI contribution.

Oracle Java is also basically effectively in KTLO mode. The biggest use of Java currently is Android, and Google is on a path to migrate to Fuchsia eventually. The second biggest use is Apache Spark/Kafka, but with LLMs now, you can pretty much re implement all of that functionality in pure C. They just want a legal angle, since this is how they make most of their money.

like the sibling tells, a massive amounts of the enterprice software does runs on java

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#192

Post by kmeisthax »

burnte wrote: post #130
TimTheTinker wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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.

He's talking about the owner of Oracle, not the people who work there. It doesn't matter how many smart and talented real humans work at Oracle, the guy running it acts like a fleshy paperclip optimizer.

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#193

Post by colechristensen »

cesarb wrote: post #134
colechristensen wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do. Software as a list of requirements and that's it. The local LLM appliance everybody has taking in a document specifying hardware, interfaces, and requirements and spitting out software changeable locally via conversation with its users. In the same way you have a cookbook with recipes to make dinner instead of ordering out.

> Software as a list of requirements and that's it. [...] a document specifying hardware, interfaces, and requirements [...] For that, you'd want the list of requirements and hardware documentation to be written in a precise, formal language. That's no different than writing them in a programming language (though a declarative one, instead of the more common imperative ones). I've in the past (way before LLMs existed…

Requirements ARE written in a precise, formal language. These days most people don't actually have any contact at all with real requirements though as practiced by professionals.

There is quite a bit of distance between the exactness of any human language and an sort of programming languages. When you have a language model loaded with software engineering best practices you do not need the exactness of a programming language to describe desired behavior.

Hardware documentation is indeed often lacking in plenty of ways but in a world where writing your own software through agents is commonplace, the hardware manufacturers (or the community) would make testing that documentation to find the problems an important part of hardware development.

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#195

Post by kmeisthax »

SR2Z wrote: post #171
throw1234567891 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You lay out my words in different order and claim I’m not correct.

No, your claim is "LLM generated code is not copyrighted." His claim is "LLM generated code is eligible for copyright."

For those wondering what the difference is: consider what happens when an LLM regurgitates its training data. It's copyrighted... but not by the person who generated it.

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#196

Post by jibal »

jiffygist wrote: post #124

I didn't know openjdk was developed by Oracle. I always thought it was a community implementation of java as opposed to Oracle's proprietary implementation.

Sun's JDK implementation was made open source (GPLv2) in 2006 and dubbed OpenJDK.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenJDK

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#197

Post by shevy-java »

Not long ago it seemed as if AI Skynet is winning the war.

Now slowly, the Empire strikes back - not just Oracle, but more and more resist the tyranny of AI skynet slop.

I am upset that these corporations drove up the RAM prices still. They need to compensate the rest of mankind for this - after all the chip market is a de-facto monopoly. They should all be sued into nothingness, then new laws must enforce healthy and fair competition, without unfair players driving up the prices willy-nilly style. Absolute AI mafia here.

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#198

Post by shevy-java »

jerf wrote: post #73

Oracle, the law firm with a tech business attached, probably wants to retain the option to sue other people for AI-washing their proprietary code, and that doesn't work if they're also publicly accepting AI contributions to their code with no apparent concern for the provenance of it. The tech business would probably tell them this isn't going to be a needle they are going to be able to successfully thread, but the l…

Makes sense, but they take an anti-AI stand, which I find good no matter for which reason they do that.

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#199

Post by shevy-java »

philipov wrote: post #178
cansofgrease wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no guy, only the lawnmower, mowing lawns. Sometimes it chops off feet.

It doesn't matter if the lawnmower is chopping off feat intentionally or not. If it's presenting a public hazard, it should be stopped. Even though the ocean couldn't care less it doesn't prevent us from building breakwalls. And Larry Ellison isn't unstoppable as the ocean.

This seems to make Larry more harmless. A lawnmower does not think. Larry thinks, so it seems to white-wash Larry here.

It's more like that movie with Stephen King where the cars and other machines turn actively evil. Hilarious movie too, not great but hilarious.

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#200

Post by burnte »

dan_q wrote: post #135
burnte wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> It's true they don't HATE people Maybe so, but perhaps the most successful part of the AI marketing pitch has been exploiting management's hatred of labor (and vice versa). A significant motivator for a lot of the nonsensical AI layoffs and initiatives over the last three years has been that it's a great opportunity for management to get ill on their slaves. Tech labor got a little too big for their britches during…

Yep, it's been a huge tool in the control games management likes to play.
Post reply on HN