4 ms·
> if licenses permit. As if licenses mattered in the LLM era Case in point https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48466812 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id
by nextaccountic 2mo ago
> if licenses permit.
As if licenses mattered in the LLM era
Case in point
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48466812 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48466812
> In looking at the code that the LLMs have produced for the project, especially given the pretty massive and widespread architectural changes needed to make the implementation libified and memory safe, we decided that the codebase is not a derivative work that would require carrying forward the GPL license and have decided to release the code under the MIT instead.
LLM are copyright laundering machines
Not only they launder copyright from Internet at large, they can also launder from specific targets
- nine_k 2mo ago> As if licenses mattered They still do, if you want your changes be made public, or even upstreamed. No sane license that gives access to the source code forbids modification for internal use; one reason is that it would be really hard to enforce.
- nextaccountic 2mo agoGrit isn't made for internal use though, and it's still changing the license
- bonzini 2mo agoI am doing something similar to that C-to-Rust rewrite. Except: 1) I'm clearly saying that it's only for my own learning experience and to find ways to improve the original program 2) I am leaving the original license in place and explicitly treating the output as a derivative. And yet I am worried that my actions are perceived as hostile. Some people just don't care.