What are your thoughts? Any counter-counter points to the author’s response to most concerns regarding open source?

  • tabular@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    2 days ago

    Open source can refer to MIT licensed code/projects where it can be taken, modified and redistributed as proprietary software without giving back. You can’t contribute without wondering if you’re doing work for a mega corp.

    I would be temped to argue that doesn’t go far enough. If copyleft wasn’t circumvented by AI I’d argue for that.

    • Badabinski@kbin.earth
      3·
      2 days ago

      I think a new GPL needs to be created to account for this. Like, “any generative system using this as an input which can ever replicate this code base (even in part), must be bound to this license.” People could then run overfitting analysis to see if they ever get their copyleft code out of the model. If they do, then they have grounds to sue. I’m fine with an LLM being trained on my code, but I want the four freedoms to be preserved if it is.