Copilot sells code other people wrote
twitter.com
Copilot sells code other people wrote
1–10 of 838 posts
Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote
#2Initially not thought about co-pilot and other ai generators this way, but now I have I’m finding it hard to ignore.
Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote
#3Programmers are fine when their creations, pretty much all of tech, resells content that other people wrote for free, but no, not code, that one must be expensive
Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote
#4We stand on the shoulders of giants. That had been the way for decades. A newer stack over the older one without much thought. And someone in the future will build even a newer stack over the current ones.
Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote
#5If GitHub could guarantee that the code Copilot had ingested was only made with OSS licenses, then I don't see what the problem is.
But as far as I understand, GitHub trained Copilot on any public repository on GitHub, meaning even if it doesn't have a license specified (so the user publishing it still has the copyright to it), then I don't see how it can be OK.
Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote
#6I guess the question is where you draw the line between a derivative work and "learnt by an AI algorithm"
Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote
#7If GitHub could guarantee that the code Copilot had ingested was only made with OSS licenses, then I don't see what the problem is. But as far as I understand, GitHub trained Copilot on any public repository on GitHub, meaning even if it doesn't have a license specified (so the user publishing it still has the copyright to it), then I don't see how it can be OK.
many OSS licenses require attribution
Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote
#8Programmers are fine when their creations, pretty much all of tech, resells content that other people wrote for free, but no, not code, that one must be expensive
The only one making money here is github. Very few programmers are selling open source code. And programmers are (in)famous for not buying software.
Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote
#9Programmers are fine when their creations, pretty much all of tech, resells content that other people wrote for free, but no, not code, that one must be expensive
%s/programmers/tech capitalists/g
Re: Copilot sells code other people wrote
#10If GitHub could guarantee that the code Copilot had ingested was only made with OSS licenses, then I don't see what the problem is. But as far as I understand, GitHub trained Copilot on any public repository on GitHub, meaning even if it doesn't have a license specified (so the user publishing it still has the copyright to it), then I don't see how it can be OK.
Even if it was trained with OSS licenses, some of them require proper attribution, which copilot doesn’t do.
Now, where the threshold is for substantial derivative work in order to require attribution is an interesting question.