3 ms·
Humans already launder GPL code by using it to learn and then producing code based on what they learned. We're very close to LLMs doing the same thing. Maybe th
by cle 3y ago
Humans already launder GPL code by using it to learn and then producing code based on what they learned. We're very close to LLMs doing the same thing. Maybe there's some fundamental difference between humans doing that and humans programming machines to do it, but I can't see it.
I don't know how GPL (or copyright in general) can survive in the long run with these technologies.
- rvnx 3y agoThere is also the other way, humans are laundering AI code, and making it look like they wrote the code, to register copyright to their own name.
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y agoEr, I'm not sure that's laundering; if a human takes AI-generated code and munges it to look human-generated, they applied enough creativity that I would expect them to legitimately have copyright on the result. I mean, I'm not a lawyer, but the bar is pretty low for qualifying.
- kube-system 3y agoI think the biggest fundamental difference is that we respect human creativity even when it is learned, because of the value in rights we ascribe to humans. It is expected and natural for humans to fairly use things they have learned as a part of an otherwise unique work. But do we ascribe the same privileges to a machine, particularly when it can be automated? The opportunity cost of the human experience itself is the reason why we even have copy rights.