6 ms·
If they get rid of licensed stuff it should be ok no? I really want to use this and seems inevitable that we'll need it just as google translate needs all of th
by sktrdie 5y ago
If they get rid of licensed stuff it should be ok no? I really want to use this and seems inevitable that we'll need it just as google translate needs all of the books + sites + comments it can get a hold of.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- mmastrac 5y agoWell... the whole training set is licensed, so you can't really get rid of it. I think that the technology they are using for this is just not ready.
- fragmede 5y agoJust retrain the model using properly licensed code? ("just" is doing a ton of heavy lifting, but let's be real, that's not impossibly hard)
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- michaelmrose 5y agoThere is no such thing as properly licensed code because it is a function of the what is legally acceptable for your company and what it intends to do with the work.
- Twirrim 5y agoThere's not many licenses that let you reuse code without including the same headers / licensing blurb. You're in public domain, non-copyleft territory. WTFPL etc.
- runeb 5y agoHow would they do that?
- oauea 5y agoRead the LICENSE file in each repo.
- rovr138 5y agoWhat guarantees it’s intact?
- willis936 5y agoIt doesn't need to be. If the license isn't positively exactly permissive then you can't use it.
- hermitdev 5y agoCan you even trust that the License in a random repo is accurate and expresses the actual copyright of all the contained code? I guess my point is, you can't be positive that even if you're following the license in a repo you forked that the repo owner hasn't already violated someone else's license, and now transitively, so have you.
- icebraining 5y ago> Can you even trust that the License in a random repo is accurate and expresses the actual copyright of all the contained code? In fact, that seems to be exactly the problem shown in the tweet - someone copy-pasted the quake source and slapped a different license on it, and copilot blindly trusted the new license.
- nextaccountic 5y agoThe overwhelming majority of code on Github, even code under permissive licenses, require attribution of the original authors.
- eCa 5y agoWhich licenses would it be ok that the training material is licensed under, though? If it produces verbatim enough copies of eg. MIT licensed material, then attribution is required. Similar with many other open source-friendly licenses. On the other hand, if only permissive licenses that also don't require attribution is used, well, then for a start, the available corpus is much smaller.
- ianhorn 5y agoUnlicensed code just means “all rights reserved.” You’d need to limit it to permissively licensed code and make sure you comply with their requirements.
- willis936 5y agoThat would be a long list of restated license terms and attributions.