I have no idea how to criticize them because I have no idea what to say about LLMs irt the GPL, other than that Free Software should try its best to legally pro

I have no idea how to criticize them because I have no idea what to say about LLMs irt the GPL, other than that Free Software should try its best to legally protect itself from LLMs being trained on its code. I've always been in favor of the GPLs being pushed as proprietary, restrictive licenses, and being as aggressive in enforcement as any other restrictive license. GPL'd software is public property. The association with Open Source, "Creative Commons" and "Public Domain" code is nothing but a handicap; proprietary code can take advantage of all permissively licensed code without pretending that it shares anything in terms of philosophy, and without sharing back unless it finds it strategically advantageous. > They are not working on a new license and Siewicz is already low-key pushing in favor of LLMs I just have no idea what I would put in a new license, or what it means to be "in favor" of LLMs. Are Free Software supporters just supposed to not use them, ever? Even if they're only trained on permissively licensed code? Do you think that it means that people are pushing to allow LLMs to train on GPL-licensed software? I just don't understand what you're trying to say. I also have zero trust in the FSF over Stallman, simply because I don't hear people who speak like Stallman at the FSF i.e. I think his vision was pushed out along with his voice. But I do not understand what you're getting at.