3 ms·
What do you mean by "checking the output"? Is there some kind of check the author says he didn't do that you think he should have? Or is your claim that using a
by ameliaquining 5mo ago
What do you mean by "checking the output"? Is there some kind of check the author says he didn't do that you think he should have? Or is your claim that using an LLM for coding is always copyright infringement? If so, I think the risk that I'll personally be the test case that resolves whatever ambiguities exist in the law is basically zero, and I don't think derailing the thread to be about that topic enlightens anyone.
- themafia 5mo ago> What do you mean by "checking the output"? At the very least you could see if it's already been open sourced under a different license. If you take GPL code and just slap MIT on it do you not consider that a violation? > Or is your claim that using an LLM for coding is always copyright infringement? I'm claiming you cannot really know. > I'll personally be It may be someone who uses or redistributes your code in any fashion. > derailing the thread I've made two posts. One with an idea and the second clarifying it. This is not "derailing the thread" under any sane definition. This is simply a complicated and relatively unexplored topic that clearly draws a lot of interest and resulting conversation from the crowd here. I think using this type of bullying rhetoric damages that conversation and harms the reputation of Hacker News in general and I always regret it when I see it.
- davidsong 5mo agoI didn't actually read any code. I generated spec documents using Claude, then later on used Codex to generate from the spec docs. Are the specs tainted? If someone else independently develops from my spec, is that also tainted? What if they hear it second hand? It's an interesting legal situation for sure.