3 ms·
> Seems like we could render all code open source Unfortunately not really. Having the source is a first step, but you also need the rights to use it (read, mo
by jraph 2y ago
> Seems like we could render all code open source
Unfortunately not really. Having the source is a first step, but you also need the rights to use it (read, modify, execute, redistribute the modifications), and only the authors of the code can grant these rights.
- torginus 2y agoDoesn't it count as 'clean room' reverse engineering - or alternatively, we could develop an LLM that's trained on the outputs and side-effects of any given function, and learns to reproduce the source code from that. Or, going back to the original idea, while the source code produced in such a way might be illegal, it's very likely 'clean' enough to train an LLM on it to be able to help in reproducing such an application.
- jraph 2y agoIANAL but if your only source for your LLM is that code, I would assume the code it produces would be at high risk of being counterfeit. I would guess clean room would still require having someone reading the LLM-decompiled code, write a spec, and have someone else write the code. But this is definitely a good question, especially given the recent court verdicts. If you can launder open source licensed code, why not proprietary binaries? Although I don't think the situation is the same. I wouldn't expect how you decompile a code matters.