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

Coding agents could make free software matter again

gjlondon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 351 posts

Re: Coding agents could make free software matter again

#331

Post by lelanthran »

threethirtytwo wrote: post #66
coffeefirst wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn’t going to happen. I can already build a ticket tracker in a weekend. I’ve been on many teams that used Jira, nobody loves Jira, none of us ever bothered to DIY something good enough. Why? Because it’s a massive distraction. It’s really fun to build all these side apps, but then you have to maintain them. I’m guessing a lot of vibeware will be abandoned rather than maintained.

Who said you’re building it? You’re telling your AI to build it while you go play golf or something.

> Who said you’re building it? You’re telling your AI to build it while you go play golf or something.

If AI can build your software for you, you aren't going to be playing golf, you're going to be standing in line in the soup kitchen.

Re: Coding agents could make free software matter again

#332

Post by gf000 »

m4rtink wrote: post #291
gf000 wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the funny thing that Linux being open-source is absolutely in line with capitalism. Just look at the list of maintainers - they are almost all paid employees of gigacorps. It is just an optimization that makes sense -- writing an OS that is compatible with all sorts of hardware is hard, let alone one that is performant, checked for vulnerabilities, etc. Why would each gigacorp waste a bunch of money on developi…

And the GPL makes it all work - as no single gigacorp can just take the whole and legally run with it for their gain, like they could if it was say MIT or BSD licensed. So you have direct competitors all contributing to a common project in harmony.

Well, GPL is good but I think this setup would still be a local optimum for gigacorps, were it MIT or so. They are using plenty of MIT libraries, e.g. Harfbuzz.

It would just simply not make sense for them to let other companies' improvements go out of the window, unless they can directly monetize it. So it doesn't apply to every project, but especially these low-lying ones would be safe even without any sensible license.

Re: Coding agents could make free software matter again

#333

Post by shakna »

tpmoney wrote: post #321
shakna wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's two parts here. The first: > it was a fair use because all Anthropic did was replace the print copies it had purchased for its central library It is only fair use where Anthropic had already purchased a license to the work. Which has zero to do with scraping - a purchase was made, an exchange of value, and that comes with rights. The second, which involves a section of the judgement a little before your quote…

I believe you are misinterpreting the ruling. Remember that a copyright claim must inherently argue that copies of the work are being made. To that end, the case analyzes multiple "copies" alleged to have been made. 1) "Copies used to train specific LLMs", for which the ruling is: > The copies used to train specific LLMs were justified as a fair use. > Every factor but the nature of the copyrighted work favors this r…

> How could you then argue that the original source from which copies were made was obtained illicitly when the terms of downloading the freely available software mandated that they be given a copy?

By the license and terms such copies are under.

> For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee, you must pass on to the recipients the same freedoms that you received. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their rights.

You _must_ show the terms. If you copy the GPL code, and it inherits the license, as the terms say it does, then you must also copy the license.

The GPL does not give you an unfettered right to copy, it comes with terms and conditions protecting it under contract law. Thus, you must follow the contract.

The GPL goes to some lengths to define its terms.

> A "covered work" means either the unmodified Program or a work based on the Program.

> Propagation includes copying, distribution (with or without modification), making available to the public, and in some countries other activities as well.

It is not just the source code that you must convey.

Re: Coding agents could make free software matter again

#334

Post by latexr »

dzhiurgis wrote: post #319
latexr wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AI megacorps aren't the only ones gaining, we all are. No, no we are not. > the leverage you have to build and ship today is higher than it was five years ago. I don’t want more “leverage to build and ship”, I want to live in a world where people aren’t so disconnected from reality and so lonely they have romantic relationships with a chat window; where they don’t turn off their brains and accept any wrong informat…

> I am left a victim > I want to live in a world where people aren’t so disconnected from reality It looks like you are the problem, not the world. Hope you find happiness!

What the bloody heck are you on about? That first quote is completely fabricated. I’d also like to live in a world where people don’t argue in bad faith, but since I have no pretence that will happen, at least I’m thankful when bad faith actors do such a poor job of concealing it.

Re: Coding agents could make free software matter again

#335

Post by mghackerlady »

pjmlp wrote: post #324
mghackerlady wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So wait, sparc solaris is the only production unix with hardware memory tagging but also linux has it? Are we talking strict SUS compliant systems (current or former because for some reason solaris is no longer listed as such despite ostensibly still being compliant unless the SRUs have seriously FUBARed some things) or unices in general? because I'd argue anyone running SUS compliant systems out of anything other th…

We are talking about SPARC ADI, still sold by Oracle and Fujistsu. https://www.oracle.com/servers/sparc Linux while not being UNIX, does support it as Oracle upstreamed SPARC ADI support during the brief time they had Oracle Linux support for SPARC. https://docs.kernel.org/arch/sparc/adi.html Now why someone would use unsupported OpenBSD on SPARC for the kinds of clients that pay for this stuff, beats me. Assuming it…

Ohh ok I see.

Why would someone use unsupported OpenBSD on SPARC for the clients that pay for it? Probably the same reason so many servers run on Rocky or Alma instead of RHEL, money. Perhaps they bought the hardware without the support contract for Solaris, or they don't want to keep paying for it

Re: Coding agents could make free software matter again

#336

Post by davemp »

tpmoney wrote: post #327
davemp wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Claiming LLMs are fair use is ridiculous bordering on ignorant or disingenuous. Here’s the 4 part test from 17 U.S.C. § 107: 1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; Fail. The use is to make trillions of dollars and be maximally disruptive. 2. the nature of the copyrighted work; Fail. In many cases at least, the copy writte…

> Fail. The use is to make trillions of dollars and be maximally disruptive. Fair use has repeatedly been found even in cases where the copies were used for commercial purposes. See Sony v. Connectix for example, where the cloning and disassembly of the PlayStation BIOS for the purposes of making a commercially sold (at retail, in a box) emulator of a then currently sold game console was determined to be fair use. >…

I appreciate the detailed reply and that there’s subtlety here.

I read the linked Bartz case. It’s disappointing that it seems limited to only the copying of books into a data set and not the result of training LLM on protected works. This is not the “use” that I was discussing and not very interesting.

The plaintiffs didn’t even challenge that the outputs of the LLMs infringe. They judge seems to agree (at least by omission) that fair use wouldn’t apply but that the outputs were transformative and in cases where they aren’t:

> [anthropic] placed additional software between the user and the underlying LLM to ensure that no infringing output ever reached the users.

So this is not true:

> he [the judge] details exactly why the facts of the case and prior case law find that training an AI on copyrighted material is fair use

The plaintiffs also make really awful arguments about “memorizing” and “learning” that falsely anthropomorphize LLMs. Which the judge shoots down.

If we’re going to give LLMs the same rights as humans, there’s unlikely to much of an argument.

I think there’s potential for an argument about how LLMs use “compressed” versions of protected works to _mechanically_ traverse language space. It would be subtle and technical so maybe not likely to work in our current context.

Re: Coding agents could make free software matter again

#337

Post by sharts »

mghackerlady wrote: post #299
mike_hearn wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, a lot of open source caused other people to lose their jobs too, all pre AI. So what goes around comes around. The Free Software movement was from day one built on cloning proprietary programs - UNIX was a commercial OS that AT&T sold, the early Linux desktop environments all looked exactly like a mashup of Windows 95 and commercial DEs, etc. Every commercial UNIX got wiped out except Apple, do you think that d…

Fwiw, AIX and to a far lesser extent Solaris still exist. I'm not exactly sure why people are using them (AIX I can maybe understand because "no one got fired for buying IBM" or whatever but there really isn't any excuse to be running Solaris nowadays since ZFS runs on Linux and and 2 of the BSD based systems and oracle seems desperate to let it die)

Companies buy AIX, etc. probably due to support, uptime, reliability guarantees. When things go south, who can you sue with OSS?

Re: Coding agents could make free software matter again

#338

Post by rkuykendall-com »

wickedsight wrote: post #153
Bockit wrote: post #10

It’s such a fun time to have 1+ decade(s) of experience in software. Knowing what simple and good are (for me), and being able to articulate it has let me create so much personal software for myself and my family. It has really felt like turning ideas into reality, about as fast as I can think of them or they can suggest them. And adding specific features, just for our needs. The latest one was a slack canvas replace…

Where/how do you host your family apps to have them conveniently available to your household? This is the thing I'm struggling with most.

I have a Synology NAS I can push docker images to. The key is to set up the docker image so it does a git pull on start, that way I just push to Github and restart it.

This was _incredibly_ hard to set up, in a way I did not expect, even with frontier models. It took me 3-4 evenings.

If someone can solve "Heroku for home server" it would open up a world of what HackerNews calls "home cooked" software.

Post reply on HN