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

My open source project was relicensed by a YC company [license updated]

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 536 posts

Re: My open source project was relicensed by a YC company [license updated]

#331

Post by close04 »

ibz wrote: post #282
danybittel wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't "fund people" just hiring without the extra steps?

Isn't that what VCs in general are doing? Hiring for more money, with more expected gains from you, with a different kind of legal arrangement, but still hiring nevertheless.

Funding people means you trust the people are so good they will push any idea to success. Funding an idea means you trust the idea is so good it will push any people to success.

Funding people means having a lot of trust in them. What's unsaid is if the investor believes coloring outside of the lines to make everyone more money is a breach of that trust, or just the normal cost/risk of business.

Re: My open source project was relicensed by a YC company [license updated]

#332

Post by Hasnep »

xandrius wrote: post #291
dheerajvs wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an interviewer, I'm seeing a huge increase in proportion of candidates cheating surreptitiously during video interviews. And it's becoming difficult to suspect any wrong-doing unless you're very watchful by looking for academic responses to questions. Why would anyone encourage building such a tool, I can't fathom.

Probably you've been out of the getting hired game but I had a glimpse of it last year: absolutely terrible. When I started you'd send a mail to the company directly about a position, you'd go to the office, have a short interview, meet the team and they'll let you know. That's it. Now it's 2 rounds of HR bs, 3 layers of tech interviews, then meet the CEO/CTO/etc. And then references and then a final "chat". And you…

A two week probation means that nearly all candidates will need to quit their current job to do the probation which seems unlikely to be popular with candidates

Re: My open source project was relicensed by a YC company [license updated]

#333

Post by Fraterkes »

tomhow wrote: post #241
ohdeargodno wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Playing with daddy's money Personal attacks like this are not ok. Sure, criticize their actions, but don't parlay that into this kind of personal swipe at the individuals and their families; that's when the line is crossed from valid critique of actions to nasty mob pile-on, and that's never ok here. Not that it should matter but as far as I can tell, the Pickle founder/CEO grew up and studied in Korea, and we have…

This guy did something very immoral and callous, and will seemingly face no real consequences for it. Roasting him in the comments of the site of the people paying him is somehow overkill?

Re: My open source project was relicensed by a YC company [license updated]

#334

Post by qualeed »

tomhow wrote: post #241
ohdeargodno wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Playing with daddy's money Personal attacks like this are not ok. Sure, criticize their actions, but don't parlay that into this kind of personal swipe at the individuals and their families; that's when the line is crossed from valid critique of actions to nasty mob pile-on, and that's never ok here. Not that it should matter but as far as I can tell, the Pickle founder/CEO grew up and studied in Korea, and we have…

Sometimes it's really surprising what comments you guys push back on and which ones you don't comment on. (Yes, I know, you can't see everything, etc.). I suspect it might be because this one wasn't dressed up enough.

While it is a personal attack, it is pretty tame compared to (non-flagged) comments I see here every day. I especially don't see it as a swipe at their family. Yet this is a pretty strong rebuke.

While I highly doubt it's because the subject is a YC pick, the optics aren't great.

Re: My open source project was relicensed by a YC company [license updated]

#335

Post by timeon »

hopelite wrote: post #283
dheerajvs wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't use LLMs to filter out participants and I expect candidates not to use LLMs to cheat.

Have you tried putting yourself in the perspective of the humans trying to find a job in a market that is turning over now and was already dystopian before AI was injected into a dystopian, hellish process of “putting on a tie and using a firm handshake” to apply into the void.

I'm afraid that thanks to this escalation hiring will be even more IRL-connection based.

Re: My open source project was relicensed by a YC company [license updated]

#336

Post by whilenot-dev »

gryfft wrote: post #327
reactordev wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be running for the hills if I were YC. This is the kind of attitude that ends up in lawsuits.

I thought tech companies were supposed to move fast and break stuff.

I think that phrase was coined in an era when the tech sector moved so fast that the prevailing law couldn't keep up. It caught up somewhat, but obviously there's still much leeway for improvement. Break all the wrong habits, rigid conventions and old traditions you want, just play along with the governing laws.

Re: My open source project was relicensed by a YC company [license updated]

#337

Post by ahtihn »

hcfman wrote: post #141

Doesn't this happen all the time with Ultralytics yolo code? They use an AGPL license, which to my understand means that anything that links with this code also becomes AGPL. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but is the license also viral if there's a network connection involved? i.e. I run the code in a container with a little network interface added ? And yet Microsoft have release code with different licenses that m…

> They use an AGPL license, which to my understand means that anything that links with this code also becomes AGPL.

It doesn't work like that.

The code linking with AGPL code needs to be AGPL (or compatible license) to comply with the license.

That doesn't mean that if you link some code with AGPL code it automatically becomes AGPL. It just means it doesn't comply with the license and therefore does not have the right to use the AGPL code.

The remedy to a license violation is not necessarily complying with it. In fact, I've never seen a case where a company using (A)GPL code in such a way was ordered to release their own code with that license. Generally, they have to simply remove the (A)GPL code, pay some damages and that's it. If they want to keep using the AGPL code, then they of course would have to comply with it, but that's their decision at that point.

Re: My open source project was relicensed by a YC company [license updated]

#338

Post by conartist6 »

diggan wrote: post #240
seunosewa wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My feeling is that they are investing in founders who they find impressive who are working in AI. Not so much in the uniqueness of their ideas.

Isn't that a very outspoken objective of YC, to fund people, not ideas? Long time ago I caught up to what YC is doing, but even when I first joined HN back in like 2013 I think the whole "Fund people, not ideas" shtick was already explicitly what they were doing, unless I remember wrong.

So why are they so insistent that they want AI ideas? I felt sick when I read the list of things they say they want to invest in and every single thing was framed as, "build some service, but for AI".

Also in this AI era I've learned something else: it isn't intelligence that builds institutions. It's philosophy, and it's faith. The AI industry is full of smart people, but If you lack a set of beliefs you won't know why you're working or what you're working towards or how to put one foot in front of the other day after day to make steady progress towards helping people over the longest time scales.

In the AI era our industry has found itself with one of the more bizarre problems I could imagine: in accepting that it builds products for AIs and not for humans, it has become philosophically bankrupt

Re: My open source project was relicensed by a YC company [license updated]

#339

Post by Dylan16807 »

hcfman wrote: post #141

Doesn't this happen all the time with Ultralytics yolo code? They use an AGPL license, which to my understand means that anything that links with this code also becomes AGPL. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but is the license also viral if there's a network connection involved? i.e. I run the code in a container with a little network interface added ? And yet Microsoft have release code with different licenses that m…

What specific kind of "linking" is happening here?

If your code is 0% derived from GPL/AGPL code in a copyright sense then there is no virality and you can generally use them together without license worries if you're careful about how you link.

Re: My open source project was relicensed by a YC company [license updated]

#340

Post by noufalibrahim »

VoidWhisperer wrote: post #234
noufalibrahim wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two separate issues. I'd be happy for a platform that encourages and facilities cheating to disappear and not be used anymore. So, on that front, I'd agree. As a side point though, the fact that someone big is funding something like that means, it's not really an issue for, atleast some, people. The license violation is a problem independent of this. If this becomes acceptable for any reason (including the one that y…

> The license violation is a problem independent of this. If this becomes acceptable for any reason (including the one that your post seemed to suggest - original work is unethical), it will have detrimental effects on a lot of good players as well. This is a fair point. Just to clarify, I still think open source theft/license violation is bad and should not be happening, even to a scummier project like this. > As a…

> Unfortunately some people have no issue with ethical concerns around what they fund as long as it stands any chance of making them money.

Which is, I think, a corruption. It's being missed in the discussion about the license violation which, to be fair, is what this thread it about but in my mind, that is the major issue.

Post reply on HN