4 ms·
I think the article starts from the position "everyone should respect the software license" and obviously promoting the SFC views. You are correct that the pro
by zvr 4y ago
I think the article starts from the position "everyone should respect the software license" and obviously promoting the SFC views.
You are correct that the problem is hard, because adding licensing info to training data and subsequently use it is something not yet accomplished by anyone (who at least has spoken publicly about it). It might be the only way out would be to have different training sets according to license, but then you lose the advantage of scale.
On the other hand, I believe it's a little much to ask SFC to do the cutting-edge research and propose solutions to Microsoft. Let's not forget that, when faced with the problem, their chosen path was "completely disregard licenses (for now), ask legal later". Many legal opinions are that there would not be any issue if copies of the input code were not reproduced verbatim; unfortunately this is not the case.
Looking forward to more exciting developments!
- skjoldr 4y agoMicrosoft could afford to train several models for every significant class of licenses. So if you don't want the model which included e.g. GPL code in its training set, you would opt for the model that was trained on the dataset which didn't include any. It's a bit of a hassle for MS, but that would partially resolve this issue.
- pabs3 4y agoAmazon claim their Copilot equivalent knows about license info.