Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems the open-source experiment has failed. Hundreds of billion-dollar companies have been built on millions of hours of free labor, on the backs of ten thousands of now-burnt-out maintainers. Yet, apart from token gestures, these exploiting entities have never shared substantial or equitable profits back. For the next generation of OSS, it would be wise to stand together and introduce a new licensing model: if a…
Good idea. The MIT license and other "pushover" licenses was built in the pre-LLM era. I don't think it is fit for purpose anymore since now maintainers are getting burnt out and most code is now being generated from OSS. A new OSS license for the AI age must be made for newer libraries, projects and existing projects that want to change licenses.
Re: Sunsetting Jazzband
#61The AI companies claim that training is fair use, so no license can prevent what is happening with AIs. It would require a clarification in copyright law that AI models are considered derivative works, and that AI generated code is a derivative work of the model and the prompt. That seems unlikely to ever happen though.