4 ms·

> I would not make a publicly searchable blog or Github repository if I were well-versed in setting such RDS on-premises You won’t. But I will and I think othe

> I would not make a publicly searchable blog or Github repository if I were well-versed in setting such RDS on-premises You won’t. But I will and I think others will as well. My goal is to help people set up RDS and I don’t care about commercialization. So happy if AI reuses all the material. There are many technical blogs that are just hobbies, or fun, or brand PR, or book tie ins or whatever.

post-it 3y ago
Yup. Commercializing things is hard. If I want to share info, I'll make a Reddit post or maybe a blog post if it's something lengthy. If I want to paywall it, I don't know where to start. I imagine there's keys-included solutions, but I doubt they can just send me e-transfers for each payment. Maybe they can send money to my PayPal? I've never used that for receiving money before. Do I need a business bank account? Will transparency rules require me to share my address publicly? Maybe I need a PO box. I just wanted to share something helpful.
- gumballindie 3y ago
  > Yup. Commercializing things is hard. If they are in abundance or in low demand.
koreth1 3y ago
> My goal is to help people set up RDS and I don’t care about commercialization. This feels like the same philosophical difference that leads to debates about GPL vs. Apache licenses. The "how dare someone else make money using my work" camp vs. the "if someone else is able to make money using my work, more power to them" camp.
- pydry 3y ago
  That was more about Google/Microsoft crying about not being given absolute freedom to do whatever they wanted with somebody else's IP. Google even banned AGPL at one point from its code hosting platform - it was that upset with open source.
- fabrice_d 3y ago
  Monetization is not what GPL vs. Apache license is about, even if that's often how the Apache proponents want to paint things. The GPL doesn't prevent you from making money; it only requires you to contribute your changes back. That way others can also make money based on your work, like... you just did!
  - prepend 3y ago
    > The GPL doesn't prevent you from making money; it only requires you to contribute your changes back. I think it does though as if my contribution is made public others are less likely to buy it. With Apache/etc, I can make modifications and sell more easily.
- prepend 3y ago
  I agree and have been having this discussion for decades of people who don’t care and just want their work to help others (Apache/bsd/mit/etc) vs those that want to have a specific ideology furthered (gpl) that all software should be free. It’s not exactly the same, but I’ve frequently heard “I don’t want someone to take my code and just sell it.” So want to use gpl or some other license that opens but prohibits selling. I don’t think the latter really works out that well, but people seem to ask for it quite a bit.
Alupis 3y ago
You aren't helping people, though, you're helping a for-profit company earn billions of dollars off your, and other's good will and knowledge. The for-profit company is helping people, in exchange for direct and/or indirect monetization. Your blog post's knowledge-dump ends up never being seen. This is why StackOverflow reacted so poorly to Stack Exchange's announcement they would be using all of your hard work to train a for-profit model. It might not be illegal - but it sure does feel weird, at a minimum.
- jefftk 3y ago
  I feel similarly to prepend: I often write things up because I want to help people by sharing knowledge. I don't care whether people get that knowledge via directly seeing it on my site vs hearing it second hand from a friend vs reading it in LLM output. It's not important that my contribution go directly from me to the other person; what matters is that they get the information they're looking for.
  - Alupis 3y ago
    How do you know anyone ever gets this information?
    - jefftk 3y ago
      I don't have a strong feedback loop here, but I generally figure that if I make it public then search engines (or now LLMs) will give it to people who want it.
      - Alupis 3y ago
        A lot like shouting into the wind. With a blog post - you get feedback via comments. With SO, you get feedback via votes and comments. With HN, you get feedback the same way. We have feedback on all of these systems so that humans can more readily discern correctness. An AI model is not going to be able to readily understand what solution is correct, lest it wouldn't need to crawl the page in the first place.
FridgeSeal 3y ago
Ha, jokes on you, I’ll just be using LLM’s to churn out obscene amounts of plausible-sounding-but-actually-incorrect amounts of content on the same topics, hosted across a variety of domains. Almost anything shortcut LLM’s provide can be a countered and aggressively wrapped in return. N.B. I’m not actually going to do this, but it’s still a straightforward attack.

post-it 3y ago

Yup. Commercializing things is hard. If I want to share info, I'll make a Reddit post or maybe a blog post if it's something lengthy. If I want to paywall it, I don't know where to start. I imagine there's keys-included solutions, but I doubt they can just send me e-transfers for each payment. Maybe they can send money to my PayPal? I've never used that for receiving money before. Do I need a business bank account? Will transparency rules require me to share my address publicly? Maybe I need a PO box. I just wanted to share something helpful.

gumballindie 3y ago
> Yup. Commercializing things is hard. If they are in abundance or in low demand.

koreth1 3y ago

> My goal is to help people set up RDS and I don’t care about commercialization. This feels like the same philosophical difference that leads to debates about GPL vs. Apache licenses. The "how dare someone else make money using my work" camp vs. the "if someone else is able to make money using my work, more power to them" camp.

pydry 3y ago
That was more about Google/Microsoft crying about not being given absolute freedom to do whatever they wanted with somebody else's IP. Google even banned AGPL at one point from its code hosting platform - it was that upset with open source.
fabrice_d 3y ago
Monetization is not what GPL vs. Apache license is about, even if that's often how the Apache proponents want to paint things. The GPL doesn't prevent you from making money; it only requires you to contribute your changes back. That way others can also make money based on your work, like... you just did!
- prepend 3y ago
  > The GPL doesn't prevent you from making money; it only requires you to contribute your changes back. I think it does though as if my contribution is made public others are less likely to buy it. With Apache/etc, I can make modifications and sell more easily.
prepend 3y ago
I agree and have been having this discussion for decades of people who don’t care and just want their work to help others (Apache/bsd/mit/etc) vs those that want to have a specific ideology furthered (gpl) that all software should be free. It’s not exactly the same, but I’ve frequently heard “I don’t want someone to take my code and just sell it.” So want to use gpl or some other license that opens but prohibits selling. I don’t think the latter really works out that well, but people seem to ask for it quite a bit.

Alupis 3y ago

You aren't helping people, though, you're helping a for-profit company earn billions of dollars off your, and other's good will and knowledge. The for-profit company is helping people, in exchange for direct and/or indirect monetization. Your blog post's knowledge-dump ends up never being seen. This is why StackOverflow reacted so poorly to Stack Exchange's announcement they would be using all of your hard work to train a for-profit model. It might not be illegal - but it sure does feel weird, at a minimum.

jefftk 3y ago
I feel similarly to prepend: I often write things up because I want to help people by sharing knowledge. I don't care whether people get that knowledge via directly seeing it on my site vs hearing it second hand from a friend vs reading it in LLM output. It's not important that my contribution go directly from me to the other person; what matters is that they get the information they're looking for.
- Alupis 3y ago
  How do you know anyone ever gets this information?
  - jefftk 3y ago
    I don't have a strong feedback loop here, but I generally figure that if I make it public then search engines (or now LLMs) will give it to people who want it.
    - Alupis 3y ago
      A lot like shouting into the wind. With a blog post - you get feedback via comments. With SO, you get feedback via votes and comments. With HN, you get feedback the same way. We have feedback on all of these systems so that humans can more readily discern correctness. An AI model is not going to be able to readily understand what solution is correct, lest it wouldn't need to crawl the page in the first place.

FridgeSeal 3y ago

Ha, jokes on you, I’ll just be using LLM’s to churn out obscene amounts of plausible-sounding-but-actually-incorrect amounts of content on the same topics, hosted across a variety of domains. Almost anything shortcut LLM’s provide can be a countered and aggressively wrapped in return. N.B. I’m not actually going to do this, but it’s still a straightforward attack.