128
AI’s Unpaid Debt: How LLM Scrapers Destroy the Social Contract of Open Source (www.quippd.com)
submitted 10 months ago by to c/programming@programming.dev
36 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

TL;DR: The big tech AI company LLMs have gobbled up all of our data, but the damage they have done to open source and free culture communities are particularly insidious. By taking advantage of those who share freely, they destroy the bargain that made free software spread like wildfire.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 10 months ago (4 children)

I believe the discourse that the FSF has managed to spread is greatly harming for the developers and communities. They are copyleft absolutists who believe no restrictions should be imposed in the use of our code, not even to megacorps that massively profit from it with oftentimes nothing in return.

I am in the process of making a revised version of the copyfarleft Cooperative Software License with a lawyer and once its done I will switch most of my development to it, with a clear warning for any company that uses my code to fuck off (or pay me I guess).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 10 months ago* (1 child)

    If the code used to train LLM was released with copyleft license then there’s only way to interpret how the output should be licensed. There’s nothing absolutist about it, just how GPL and such were intended to work. If you don’t like it, don’t use it to train models.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago

    I think you misinterpreted my comment? I mean the Free Software Foundation is copyleft absolutist, as in, they will defend that model of licensing no matter what. I agree, of course, an LLM can be trained legally with GPL code, as you say that's how it is.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    You don't want copyleft. What you're looking for is called "copyright"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

    No, its copyfarleft. Both it and copyleft USE copyright. I recommend you the Telecommunist Manifest on this topic, and you can find the stupid take of the FSF on this in here. I don't want copyleft anymore, I don't think it is enough. The FSF's justification is hipocritical and coward as they state that "...embedding that desire (ethical behavior) in software license requirements will backfire, by legitimizing fundamentally unjust power over others" while using the power of copyright themselves, and in a world where we already see bad actors profiting from collective work.

    Edit: Adding to this, the first word of the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE is Copyright lmao

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent