20
AI Code is Hollowing Out Open Source, and Maintainers are Looking the Other Way (www.quippd.com)
submitted 7 months ago by to c/linux@programming.dev
9 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

TL;DR: The advent of AI based, LLM coding applications like Anthropic’s Claude and ChatGPT have prompted maintainers to experiment with integrating LLM contributions into open source codebases. This is a fast path to open source irrelevancy, since the US copyright office has deemed LLM outputs to be uncopyrightable. This means that as more uncopyrightable LLM outputs are integrated into nominally open source codebases, value leaks out of the project, since the open source licences are not operative on public domain code. That means that the public domain, AI generated code can be reused without attribution, and in the case of copyleft licences - can even be used in closed source projects.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

I have seen this sentiment, but I don't know what the world looks like without copyright protections for creative works.

Does open source exist in your vision? How?

My imagination for this topic may not be as expansive as yours, but my interpretation is that if people contribute code to the commons, it will immediately available for any use - including for use by massive corporations.

So it ends up looking like people working for big companies for free.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    But any source code leak is also open sourcing in that world.

    You cannot prevent someone from "hacking" the hardware they buy to use it from a PC instead of being forced to use an app.

    Maybe I'm wrong, but that's the way I understand it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 7 months ago

    But any source code leak is also open sourcing in that world.

    I don't see how that helps free software, though. Those programmers got paid. Volunteers didn't.

    It ends up with a weird reverse robin hood situation. LLM vendors steal from the poor, sell that to the rich. Do the rich give back? Only if it is stolen from them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent