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

241–250 of 398 posts

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#241

Post by tokioyoyo »

andrekandre wrote: post #231
tokioyoyo wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. I’m asking in good faith. I was skeptical in 2023, but took the approach of using it at least once a week, with all latest models to see the evolution. It’s obvious that the industry is moving that way, and at this point it would be a career-suicide for seniors+ to not be able to drive AI to achieve their objectives . I’m not saying it’s good for everything, but we’ve gone very far in terms of capabilities in the…

your argument is basically: the industry is moving to it so we should get on board or be left behind it would be more convincing if you had concrete examples of technical merit and quality/speed improvements that worked for you or your team that justify going all-in

That is, indeed, my argument. As much as I’ve been loving coding since the past 20+ years, basically from my childhood, I currently do it mostly for living and some side projects. I don’t care about code quality in my side projects, and at work… well, I want to keep getting raises, be employable, and support myself.

Priorities.

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#243

Post by ljm »

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.

It won't be made of people for long given how many Ellison is culling to prop up his gamble on AI data centres.

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#245

Post by SR2Z »

tga_d wrote: post #240
Alive-in-2025 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if I as a human use an llm to do something technical that would qualify copyright, it should still qualify for copyright. How do you decide how much human is copyrightable. If I use a package that writes code or use a library for some piece of it, I could still copyright. I don't like this idea that llm code can't be owned by a human, copyrighted. It's just code. I think your last example with flock camera is…

You seem to have misunderstood an is/ought distinction. You may hold the (fairly extreme, as far as copyright goes) position that surveillance footage should be subject to copyright, but it's well established that it's not. Who owns the camera is irrelevant. At least in the US; I'm not aware of any jurisdictions that hold otherwise. This is why Wikipedia articles on world events in the past few decades are full of st…

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_disput...

This is a great case to study, but no determination of copyright was made. The only actual lawsuit was filed by PETA arguing that the monkey should have copyright, which led to a settlement with the human photographer and nothing else because obviously that's not possible.

For various reasons (mostly $$$) the guy never actually got a judgement. I think the chances are good that he could have prevailed in court; there is significant creative input to setting up cameras and triggers in a way to convince a wild monkey to take a selfie. It's not like he just left his camera sitting somewhere on accident and came back to find a photo in it.

I'm also not a lawyer, but I did do a lot of work in copyright for a company you've heard about.

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#247

Post by dgellow »

dan_q wrote: post #132
dgellow wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given how much of the industry is SaaS that would be such a self own! Wow, fantastic, you can build all your software in house, zero dependencies. Wait, your users can do the same? And they don’t need to pay you anymore for any of your cool services because they just asked their agents to recreate your infra from scratch? Interesting, truly the future of humanity

> Wow, fantastic, you can build all your software in house, zero dependencies. Wait, your users can do the same? And they don’t need to pay you anymore for any of your cool services because they just asked their agents to recreate your infra from scratch? The cherry on top is that OpenAI and Anthropic brainwashed your coworkers and your company's C-suite into uploading the entirety of the "proprietary" codebase onto…

No need to brainwash, they did it willingly and with a smile, tweeting about how they are part of the revolution while telling us all how we will be left behind

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#248

Post by TimTheTinker »

philipov wrote: post #236
shevy-java wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Rather than harmless, what the lawnmower analogy achieves is to make him seem blameless. "How can you assign blame to a thing that's just doing what it's built to do without any intent?" It's important to push back against that. Intent isn't a necessary condition for something to be dangerous, and so it's not necessary to ask whether it is intentional or not. A rabid dog will be put down regardless of who is to blame…

I think the point of the lawnmower analogy is to subjectively characterize Larry Ellison and Oracle from the viewpoint of someone who has had the unfortunate experience of having to deal personally with either of them in some way. You feel powerless against the machine, as it were, and the best course of action is to keep yourself far from the blade.

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#249

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

Re: Oracle bans AI-generated code from OpenJDK

#250

Post by CursedSilicon »

philipallstar wrote: post #185
cyanydeez wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

That's because you've had years of consuming media that blames everything on billionaires.

Ah, yes. The media. Famously the voice of the proletariat and the oppressed

Walter Lippmann is spinning in his grave

Post reply on HN