2 ms·
Eschewing the ethics of such an action, my take would be that it happens (and will happen) regardless of license and no one can stop it unless those utilizing s
by gausswho 2y ago
Eschewing the ethics of such an action, my take would be that it happens (and will happen) regardless of license and no one can stop it unless those utilizing such code leave evidence that they disregarded the license.
- bayindirh 2y agoThe models can and will reproduce a lot of their training set given the correct prompt [0]. How you can know you're infringing a license if the model doesn't tell you from which repository it got "inspired" for generating that code? GitHub was working on a feature which supposedly tells you which repository the snippet you just got is copied from, or IOW, which repositories have similar code, sorted by date. Effectively pushing the blame further on you by making you spend the time you just saved by investigating which repository provided the code you just got from "AI". Supposedly, if the license is not friendly, you can delete the snippet and write your own version. :) [0]: https://x.com/docsparse/status/1581461734665367554 https://x.com/docsparse/status/1581461734665367554
- gausswho 2y agoGithub, and others, have strategies to mitigate culpability. One way, as you note, is to hand off such responsibility to the consumer. Another is to suppress the training set from passing through too close to verbatim. To be crystal, I am sympathetic with GPL and copyleft movements. I do think we've entered a time where it will be hard for license holders to enforce their rights. The laundering will only get more effective. And, per my original comment, competitive pressure will incentivize models to sail the most piratey tack.