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

Reverse-engineering Viktor and making it open source

matijacniacki.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 87 posts

Re: Reverse-engineering Viktor and making it open source

#51

Post by dsjoerg »

kklisura wrote: post #20

I find it fascinating that this is just some _plumbing_ around some LLM - sold as a product and "AI coworker". They don't own the LLM model. You're just one silent update from not delivering what you promised.

"just" is doing a lot of work there. There's a stack, and everyone is fighting and racing to figure out which parts of the stack are commodities and which have protectable IP.

For example, years ago someone might have said: "Software programs are "just" some instructions on top of a computer, which does the actual computing work. The software companies don't own the computer. The next version of the computer might not even be capable of running the software." And for some kinds of software, they'd be right. Some programs turned out to be more replaceable than others.

I assume the GetViktor folks are hoping that some combination of know-how and learnings from real customer interactions and data will help them build or find a sustainable competitive advantage in some niche.

> They don't own the LLM model. You're just one silent update from not delivering what you promised.

This is true but a small risk IMO. Worst case they can shift to open-weight LLMs for inference. I would bet on LLMs being an increasingly commodity part of the stack.

Re: Reverse-engineering Viktor and making it open source

#52

Post by gwking »

john_strinlai wrote: post #49
popcorncowboy wrote: post #15

Every part of this is genuinely funny. Viktor launching basically OpenClaw for slack (because claw is MIT so yolo let's go mac some monnney and PJ outta Dubai etc etc). Some guy getting all their source code just by asking Viktor for it. Then rebuilding their core in a couple days because there's basically nothing there. push MIT to Github. TeamViktor's faces surely? But they're busy diamond handsing all the way to t…

> MIT so yolo let's go mac some monnney and PJ outta Dubai etc etc > TeamViktor's faces surely? But they're busy diamond handsing all the way to the moon so probably don't even care. XD would anyone please be so kind to translate these parts of this comment into something a 45+ year old would understand?

From one “old guy” to another:

PJ = private jet

Diamond hands and to the moon are crypto trader slang

Makes me laugh answering this question, because the meaning is all there if you skip over all the meme words.

Re: Reverse-engineering Viktor and making it open source

#53

Post by Infernal »

john_strinlai wrote: post #49
popcorncowboy wrote: post #15

Every part of this is genuinely funny. Viktor launching basically OpenClaw for slack (because claw is MIT so yolo let's go mac some monnney and PJ outta Dubai etc etc). Some guy getting all their source code just by asking Viktor for it. Then rebuilding their core in a couple days because there's basically nothing there. push MIT to Github. TeamViktor's faces surely? But they're busy diamond handsing all the way to t…

> MIT so yolo let's go mac some monnney and PJ outta Dubai etc etc > TeamViktor's faces surely? But they're busy diamond handsing all the way to the moon so probably don't even care. XD would anyone please be so kind to translate these parts of this comment into something a 45+ year old would understand?

40's as well but first line is basically, hey here's some MIT licensed code we can do whatever we want with it, surely we can use it to make some money to the point we can afford private jets in and out of Dubai.

"TeamViktor's faces surely?" = imagine the looks on their faces "diamond handsing to the moon" = hanging onto a situation that looks bad now hoping it gets better, throwing good money after bad, the opposite of cutting your losses.

Re: Reverse-engineering Viktor and making it open source

#54

Post by bigbadfeline »

duskdozer wrote: post #11
zvqcMMV6Zcr wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Terms of service might matter more for terminating that user account. Whole ordeal is just plain copyright violation. The author had no licence to that internal code, and whitewashing it with LLM will achieve nothing. That case is much clearer than that recent GPL->BSD attempt story.

If LLM-generated code isn't considered a derivative work of the original, then whether the author was licensed to use the code doesn't matter. But I'm sure the courts will rule in favor of your view regardless. Laundering GPL is in corps' interest and laundering their code is not.

I'm not sure why people are clinging to some fuzzy and stretched out notion of copyright and the GPL in a particular. LLM's do NOT just copy code, with the right prompting, they generate entirely new code which can produce the same results as already existing code - GPLed or not.

If copyright is extended to cover such cases we'll have to become all lawyers and do nothing but sue each other because the fuzziness of it will make it impossible to reject any case, no matter how frivolous or irrelevant.

Re: Reverse-engineering Viktor and making it open source

#55

Post by DarmokJalad1701 »

gwking wrote: post #52
john_strinlai wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> MIT so yolo let's go mac some monnney and PJ outta Dubai etc etc > TeamViktor's faces surely? But they're busy diamond handsing all the way to the moon so probably don't even care. XD would anyone please be so kind to translate these parts of this comment into something a 45+ year old would understand?

From one “old guy” to another: PJ = private jet Diamond hands and to the moon are crypto trader slang Makes me laugh answering this question, because the meaning is all there if you skip over all the meme words.

I am not that old, but I interpreted that as working in pajamas in Dubai. I guess yours makes more sense.

Re: Reverse-engineering Viktor and making it open source

#56

Post by john_strinlai »

Infernal wrote: post #53
john_strinlai wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> MIT so yolo let's go mac some monnney and PJ outta Dubai etc etc > TeamViktor's faces surely? But they're busy diamond handsing all the way to the moon so probably don't even care. XD would anyone please be so kind to translate these parts of this comment into something a 45+ year old would understand?

40's as well but first line is basically, hey here's some MIT licensed code we can do whatever we want with it, surely we can use it to make some money to the point we can afford private jets in and out of Dubai. "TeamViktor's faces surely?" = imagine the looks on their faces "diamond handsing to the moon" = hanging onto a situation that looks bad now hoping it gets better, throwing good money after bad, the opposite…

thanks (and thanks gwking as well).

more or less what i thought, but the "PJ outta Dubai" really made me question myself.

Re: Reverse-engineering Viktor and making it open source

#59

Post by skeledrew »

limagnolia wrote: post #45
skeledrew wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to US courts, the output can't be copyrighted at all. It's automatically in public domain after the "whitewash", regardless of original copyright. https://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/2026/03/us-supreme-court-de...

Thats not at all what this ruling said. What the courts found was that an AI cannot hold copyright as the author. That copyright requires a human creative element. Not that anything that was generated by an LLM can't be subject to copyright. As an example, a photo taken from a digital camera can be subject to copyright because of the creative element involved in composing and taking the photo. Likewise, source code g…

> That copyright requires a human creative element.

Sure, but the aim of that creative element would also be a consideration I'd think (and lawyers will argue). If someone sets up a camera on a 360° rotating arm and leaves it to take pictures at random intervals, it's unlikely to be considered "creative" from a copyright perspective.

Same for source code generated by an LLM, with the primary guidance of the human author being to "create a copy of this existing thing that I got", vs "create a thing that solves this problem in a way that I came up with". The former is recreating something that already exists, using detailed knowledge of that thing to shape the output. The latter is creating something that may or may not exist, using desire/need and imagination to shape the output. And I can't see reason for the former to be copyrightable.

But also, in either case, an ultimate objective was achieved: liberating the thing from its "owners" and initial copyright.

Re: Reverse-engineering Viktor and making it open source

#60

Post by sergiotapia »

john_strinlai wrote: post #49
popcorncowboy wrote: post #15

Every part of this is genuinely funny. Viktor launching basically OpenClaw for slack (because claw is MIT so yolo let's go mac some monnney and PJ outta Dubai etc etc). Some guy getting all their source code just by asking Viktor for it. Then rebuilding their core in a couple days because there's basically nothing there. push MIT to Github. TeamViktor's faces surely? But they're busy diamond handsing all the way to t…

> MIT so yolo let's go mac some monnney and PJ outta Dubai etc etc > TeamViktor's faces surely? But they're busy diamond handsing all the way to the moon so probably don't even care. XD would anyone please be so kind to translate these parts of this comment into something a 45+ year old would understand?

don't let age phase you out of culture. that's not real.

william shatner is near 100 and the man is locked in with the latest stuff.

Post reply on HN