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

Codestral: Mistral's Code Model

mistral.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 225 posts

Re: Codestral: Mistral's Code Model

#151

Post by hehdhdjehehegwv »

IshKebab wrote: post #148
hehdhdjehehegwv wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So basically I, as an open source author, had my code eaten up by Mistral without my consent, but if I want to use their code model I’m subject to a bunch of restrictions that benefit their bottom line? The problem these AI companies have is they live in a glass house and they can’t throw IP rocks around without breaking their own “your content is our training data” foundation. They only reason I can think of that Go…

> So basically I, as an open source author, had my code eaten up by Mistral without my consent Not necessarily. You consented to people reading your code and learning from it when you posted it on Github. Whether or not there's an issue with AI doing the same remains to be settled. It certainly isn't clear cut that separate consent would be required.

I did not give consent to train on my software and the license does not allow commercial use of it.

They have taken my code and now are dictating how I can use their derived work.

Personally I think these tools are useful, but if the data comes from the commons the model should also belong to the commons. This is just another attempt to gain private benefit from public work.

There are legal issues to be resolved, and there is an explosion of lawsuits already, but the fact pattern is simple and applies to nearly all closed-source AI companies.

Re: Codestral: Mistral's Code Model

#152

Post by Liquix »

IshKebab wrote: post #148
hehdhdjehehegwv wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So basically I, as an open source author, had my code eaten up by Mistral without my consent, but if I want to use their code model I’m subject to a bunch of restrictions that benefit their bottom line? The problem these AI companies have is they live in a glass house and they can’t throw IP rocks around without breaking their own “your content is our training data” foundation. They only reason I can think of that Go…

> So basically I, as an open source author, had my code eaten up by Mistral without my consent Not necessarily. You consented to people reading your code and learning from it when you posted it on Github. Whether or not there's an issue with AI doing the same remains to be settled. It certainly isn't clear cut that separate consent would be required.

MIT/BSD code is fair game, but isn't the whole point of GPL/AGPL "you can read and share and use this, but you can't take it and roll it into your closed commercial product for profit"? It seems like what Mistral and co are doing is a fundamental violation of the one thing GPL is striving to enforce.

Re: Codestral: Mistral's Code Model

#154

Post by James_K »

> Democratising code

Did yall see what happened when they democratised art? I don't want to have a billion and one AI garbage libraries to sift through before I can find something reliable and human-made. At least the potential for creating horrific political software is slightly lower than with simple images.

Re: Codestral: Mistral's Code Model

#155

Post by portaouflop »

hehdhdjehehegwv wrote: post #151
IshKebab wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So basically I, as an open source author, had my code eaten up by Mistral without my consent Not necessarily. You consented to people reading your code and learning from it when you posted it on Github. Whether or not there's an issue with AI doing the same remains to be settled. It certainly isn't clear cut that separate consent would be required.

I did not give consent to train on my software and the license does not allow commercial use of it. They have taken my code and now are dictating how I can use their derived work. Personally I think these tools are useful, but if the data comes from the commons the model should also belong to the commons. This is just another attempt to gain private benefit from public work. There are legal issues to be resolved, and…

Mistral is as open as they get, most others are far worse. Here you can use the model without issues, as others are saying it’s doubtful they would sue you if you were to use code generated by the model in a commercial app

Re: Codestral: Mistral's Code Model

#157

Post by batch12 »

analyte123 wrote: post #48

The license for this [1] prohibits use of the model and its outputs for any commercial activity, or even any "live" (whatever that means) conditions, commercial or not. There seems to be an exclusion for using the code outputs as part of "development". But wait! It also prohibits "any internal usage by employees in the context of the company's business activities". However you interpret these clauses, this puts their…

If they can make agreements with arbitrary terms, why can't we? [0]

[0] https://o565.com/content-ownership-and-licensing-agreement/

Re: Codestral: Mistral's Code Model

#158

Post by icedchai »

whiplash451 wrote: post #73
icedchai wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm skeptical. I've run into people who used LLMs to code, then can't debug it without someone else's help. It may get you 80% there though.

It does not get you 80% there if it achieves what you described. It rather gets you 100% into trouble.

I agree with you. I've had to debug some of that junk.

Re: Codestral: Mistral's Code Model

#159

Post by happypumpkin »

checkyoursudo wrote: post #128
JimDabell wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I normally ask about building a multi-tenant system using async SQLAlchemy 2 ORM where some tables are shared between tenants in a global PostgreSQL schema and some are in a per-tenant schema. Nothing gets it right first time, but when ChatGPT 4 first came out, I could talk to it more and it would eventually get it right. Not long after that though, ChatGPT degraded. It would get it wrong on the first try, but with e…

I had a similar experience. I was trying to get GPT 4 to write some R/Stan code for a bit of bayesian modelling. It would get the model wrong, and then I would walk it through how to do it right, and by the end it would almost get it right, but on the next step, it would be like, oh, this is what you want, and the output was identical to the first wrong attempt, which would start the loop over again.

Similar experience using GPT4 for help with Apple's Accessibility API. I wanted to do some non-happy-path things and it kept looping between solutions that failed to satisfy at least one of a handful of requirements that I had, and in ways that I couldn't combine the different "solutions" to meet all the requirements.

I was eventually able to figure it out with the help of some early 2010s blog posts. Sadly I didn't test giving it that context and having it attempt to find a solution again (and this was before web browsing was integrated with the web app).

More of an issue than it not knowing enough to fulfill my request (it was pretty obscure so I didn't necessarily expect that it would be able to) was that it didn't mind emitting solutions that failed to meet the requirements. "I don't know how to do that" would've been a much preferred answer.

Re: Codestral: Mistral's Code Model

#160

Post by mypalmike »

dieortin wrote: post #111
gyudin wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I ask software developers to do the same thing and give them the same amount of time. None of them ever write a single line of code :)

Give an LLM all the time you want, and they will still not get it right. In fact, they most likely will give worse and worse answers with time. That’s a big difference with a software developer.

My experience is very different. Often it (ChatGPT or Copilot, depending on what I'm trying to accomplish) gets things right the first time. When it doesn't, it's usually close enough that a bit of manual modification is all that's needed. Sometimes it's totally wrong, but I can usually point it in the right direction.
Post reply on HN