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

John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 515 posts

Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

#271

Post by wmf »

mjr00 wrote: post #136
skrebbel wrote: post #91

This is because Carmack doesn't really do OSS, he just does code dumps and tacks on a license ("a gift"). That's of course great and awesome and super nice, but he's not been painstakingly and thanklessly maintaining some key linux component for the last 20 years or something like that. It's an entirely different thing; he made a thing, sold it, and then when he couldn't sell more of it, gave it away. That's nice! Bu…

> It's an entirely different thing; he made a thing, sold it, and then when he couldn't sell more of it, gave it away. You're right and it's worth pointing out that a lot of open source has the opposite lifecycle: the authors make a thing, aren't sure how to sell it, so they open source it and hope to eventually sell something peripheral, i.e. "open core" with paid plugins or enterprise support. In these cases, open…

the authors make a thing, aren't sure how to sell it, so they open source it and hope to eventually sell something peripheral

I know it sucks but we need to admit that this doesn't work and we need to beat the hope out of people. You aren't going to make money later. The very few cases where it worked were flukes or fake.

Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

#272

Post by applfanboysbgon »

sirtaj wrote: post #263
adiabatichottub wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's been something lost over time about the philosophy of open source. It appeared at a time when it was becoming apparent that computers represented a new type of technology where you couldn't just "look under the hood". An independent mechanic or machinist could repair a car to spec. A carpenter didn't need original blueprints of the house to create an addition. You could disassemble a typewriter or a sewing ma…

Indeed. Maybe it's just a function of passed time, but it feels like people surrounded by hustlers - including themselves - look at this and think "what's the hustle behind this?" because they can't imagine anyone doing this for any other reason. I get it, but it's quite sad.

It's a function of the economy going in the shitter, with food and housing prices tripling or quadrupling while wages go up 5 or 10%. People want to be paid for their work because they can't afford to pay rent giving gifts away, and hustling is the way to survive because there aren't enough jobs or even if they have a job it's not enough.

Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

#274

Post by NeutralCrane »

barrowclift wrote: post #53
boredtofears wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its a lot less odd when you remember that he's running an AI company himself.

I'm seeing your comment's downvoted, I'd like to hear from those that did as to why. Doesn't his current venture with his AGI startup Keen Technologies deserve being called out as a potential conflict of interest, here?

Because whether there is a conflict of interest or not, the argument can and should be examined on its own merits.

Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

#275

Post by raincole »

arjie wrote: post #108

Has anyone else noticed a cultural shift around monetization of output? I think there wasn't as much back when I first started using open-source programs, both as a user, and a small-time contributor for decades now. And I've noticed this on other things too. A short while ago, someone on Reddit pointed out that something on Google Maps was wrong and so I went and submitted a fix and told them how to and I received a…

> someone on Reddit pointed out that something on Google Maps was wrong and so I went and submitted a fix and told them how to and I received a barrage of comments about working for free for a corporation that's making money off me

This tells you about Reddit's demographic and nothing else.

Remember Reddit has a dedicated sub for antiwork. It used to have a sub for shoplifting (I'm not kidding.)

Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

#276

Post by NeutralCrane »

Findecanor wrote: post #26
boredtofears wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its a lot less odd when you remember that he's running an AI company himself.

Ah.. So the old “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!”.

Yes, but likely in the exact inverse than what is implied here. Carmack has generational wealth, he is likely fine financially regardless of how AI pans out. The many individuals who feel they should be financially compensated for code they open sourced are likely far more invested financially in that particular outcome.

Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

#277

Post by Qwertious »

nomel wrote: post #51
truncate wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More people use Linux, more recognition Linux itself get which directly or indirectly gets some more donations, developers etc. With AI, the link is not clear at all. Its just pure consumption. There is no recognition.

> There is no recognition I've never written or contributed to open source code with this being the goal. I never even considered this is why people do it.

I don't dispute your own personal motives, but if it's never been a goal for most people, then CC0 would be more popular than the BSD or MIT license - it's simpler and much more legally straightforward to apply.

Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

#279

Post by raincole »

OSaMaBiNLoGiN wrote: post #4

I think one of the more prominent issues folks take with mass training on OSS is that the companies doing it are now profiting for having done it. In his follow-up post he talks about him open sourcing old games as a gift, and he doesn't much care how people receive that gift, just that they do. He doesn't acknowledge that Anthropic, OpenAI, etc, are profiting while the original authors are not. The original authors…

> But that doesn't mean they don't care if other people profit from their work.

He clearly states his opinions. He doesn't care if other people profit from his code.

>> GPL would prevent outright exploitation by our competitors, but those were to allay fears of my partners to allow me to make the gift

He believes other members in OSS community should have this mindset. Of course it might not be fair, especially for members who are as financially fortunate as him. His point is clear nevertheless.

Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists

#280

Post by nickff »

SllX wrote: post #224
nickff wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copyright is all about gating access, as media rights holders for sports well know.

Well no, it’s about legally gating the ability to copy so the original author doesn’t have to compete in the same market to sell his own book with every other bloke with a printing press and a copy of the book. Everything else is an addendum.

That may be the reason copyright came to be, but it's much more expansive now.
Post reply on HN