I can't quite figure out what "it" refers to in "it would strengthen our communities". It's probably obvious, but I still can't work it out (the GPL maybe?)
John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists
341–350 of 515 posts
Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists
#342This 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 a little disheartening that someone can release their code and still be told they "don't really do OSS".
Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists
#343This 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…
OSS wasn't always endless PRs and other git-specific related crap, and I think that line of logic is fucking ridiculous.
Open source when I started was a website or BBS where a tarball of code was there waiting for me to download it. It wasn't PRs/issues/CI/career-finagling/virtue-seeking/etc; it was just the tarballl full of source code.
I agree wholeheartedly with Carmack and I am glad to see people with that perspective. I think exactly the same with regards to all of the OSS projects and code that I put out for 20+ years before LLMs were a thing. nothing changes; i'd do it again.
I didn't do it to make a career, I did it because I believe in the greater ethos of OSS.
Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists
#344This 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 was night and day between them and Epic back then, which I think is entirely why Unreal Engine grew to be such a juggernaut, and iD tech stagnated.
Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists
#345Earlier quoted context omitted.
See https://opensource.org/about/history-of-the-open-source-init... under ‘Coining “Open Source”’: The conferees believed the pragmatic, business-case grounds that had motivated Netscape to release their code illustrated a valuable way to engage with potential software users and developers, and convince them to create and improve source code by participating in an engaged community. The conferees also believed that i…
The 'bazaar' system is a wonderful methodology, but there is a place for the 'cathedral', and it is no less open source.
Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists
#346Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then by your definition, SQLite isn't open-source because it's a code dump with a license, but outsiders are not allowed to participate in shaping (the official copy of) the code.
Not sure if this was your intent, but what WOULD the result be of an AI reimplemented SQLite? They've got some of the best technical documentation in the game; there are lots of directions this could go...
Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists
#347This 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…
>This is because Carmack doesn't really do OSS, he just does code dumps OSS wasn't always endless PRs and other git-specific related crap, and I think that line of logic is fucking ridiculous. Open source when I started was a website or BBS where a tarball of code was there waiting for me to download it. It wasn't PRs/issues/CI/career-finagling/virtue-seeking/etc; it was just the tarballl full of source code. I agree…
The greater ethos of OSS, as it is conceived of by most of its practitioners isn't "source availability is the same thing".
Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists
#348Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one cares. Copyright in general is done, and we are all stronger now. Don't fight AI, fight for open models.
I know tech normally breaks the rules/laws and have been able to just force through their desired outcome (to the detriment of society), but I don't think they are going to be able just ignore copyright. If anything those who depend on copyright see how ruthlessly/poor faith tech has treated previous industries and/or basically anyone once they have the leverage. Tech is becoming universally hated whereas before it w…
Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists
#349All due respect to Carmack but I think his take is probably influenced by his investment in his own AI company. There doesn’t seem to be many on this space who have any ethical or moral problems with profiting from the work of others and not contributing anything back to the commons. If we all intended our work in OSS the way he did maybe we’d all see it his way too. Copy left licenses are generally intended, afaict,…
Carmacks ai company explicitly does not work on LLMs though
Re: John Carmack about open source and anti-AI activists
#350All due respect to Carmack but I think his take is probably influenced by his investment in his own AI company. There doesn’t seem to be many on this space who have any ethical or moral problems with profiting from the work of others and not contributing anything back to the commons. If we all intended our work in OSS the way he did maybe we’d all see it his way too. Copy left licenses are generally intended, afaict,…
I think it’s more than that. He is always pro performance, pro technology, and maybe libertarian, too.