I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
171–180 of 419 posts
Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with the spirit of this comment, but I worry about the implementation. See the comment of Manly read in this section. Once the threat of payment approaches, you can just switch to a free fork. A single person can't really win a trial against a big, well-funded company.
I don't really see how this is an issue, depending on the license text it's trivial to make the license apply in the same manner. As for winning, I think that's more of a US-centric view, if you sue elsewhere in the world there's plenty of courts that are happy to slap big tech.
Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
And yes, people being able to use your code for whatever they want is absolutely more open than having restrictions on how/who gets to use it. One other model that can also work well is to dual license as GPL + commercial, so people who want to publish their work can use the GPL license but you can potentially fund the project from license sales to closed source users using the commercial licensing option. I see this…
Why would it be unfeasible to just share the code parts that are GPL?
Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
#174Unfortunately, this seems on par with recruitment practices in the summer of 2025. I can almost guarantee that they didn't even read that application / cover letter and auto-magically rejected it. "the team doesn't have the capacity to review additional applications" Zero effort. They probably didn't even realize the relevance of that specific application for that role. Unbelievable, I swear!
Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it short term? Seems like the MS and the others got exactly what they wanted. Exploiting the passion for free work is a trade that will keep happening as long as there are passionate inexperienced people.
Sorry but have to call b.s. here. Many of us did in fact, in this very forum, kept pointing out that dumping on GPL (and the man and his ideas behind it) was a mistake and that non-gpl oss was for chumps. And we were greyed to oblivion. Same exact story as with surveillance tech. Hackernews is hugely responsible for many of the ailments of this field in 21st century. Own it.
Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
#176This post can give you some visibility unless somebody sees it as frustration/negativity then they won't bother either.
aside of the core topic, best way to get a job these days is unfortunately either some elite job boards that work and both sides know why... or personal relations.
All the automatic HR/recruitment platforms is illness and i'm sure that's what victimized your genuine application there.
Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
#177Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
While that sounds rational, I worry that the same reasoning is not applied in the HR department. But that might be just my frustration from experiences. To continue the devil's advocate: why bother with all of this, if the company doesn't have to and the OSS version is enough anyway?
This is an incredibly short-term thinking. The reason is simple: the author is not obliged to continue while this sort of thing can be demoralizing. I don't know about the author's approach to this matter, but if I would find out that a company is making a killing using my software and then that company would refuse to even give me an interview I'd probably stop loving doing what I do. Sure, the software is under MIT…
It's very sad, but the resigned and almost subservient tone of the author does not lead me to believe a lesson has been learned.
Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
#179I'll say it: why would they pay him if he's already doing the work for free from their PoV? Oh, they ignored him. I am not sure if that puts the company in a better light.
But he's not doing the work for free. He's doing something else for free which they use. He has domain knowledge with the library that noone else has, their can either pay someone to learn it or they can hire someone with it.
If this wasn't available for free, they would gladly pay for a programmer to create it. But if it's already free, they can use it as a starting point. Maybe they'd need to internalize/extend it. But the option of paying for the work already done is gone.
Do this for each npm dependency and you're looking at huge savings.
Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
It mentioned an "open position in the team implementing the secret, unreleased feature of Claude Desktop," which doesn't specify whether the "secret" feature is AI-related or UI-related. My guess leans towards the former.
To give the full quote, it says: > I found out that Anthropic had an open position in the team implementing the secret, unreleased feature of Claude Desktop using enigo. where enigo is his input library. It's quite interesting that you chose to end your quote a few words before the end of the sentence.