3 ms·
That doesn't work: your suggestion applies at too late a stage in the flowchart. It looks like: 1. Do you need a license to use materials for training, or to u
by jefftk 5y ago
That doesn't work: your suggestion applies at too late a stage in the flowchart. It looks like:
1. Do you need a license to use materials for training, or to use the output model?
2. If so, does the code's license allow this?
GitHub is claiming 'no' for #1, that they do not need any sort of license to the training materials. This is reasonably standard in ML; it's also how GPT-3 etc were trained.
Now, whether a court will agree with their interpretation is an interesting question, but if they are correct then #2 doesn't come into play.
- rubyist5eva 5y agoIf the answer is 'no' for #1 than the GPL might as well not exist because now we can just launder it through co-pilot and close it off, a rather distorted interpretation of "fair use" if you ask me. "Dear copilot, I'm writing a Unix-like operating system...."
- jefftk 5y agoI don't think that's right; I wrote a response above: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27779155 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27779155