this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2024
388 points (99.5% liked)

Programming

17496 readers
40 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities [email protected]



founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 months ago (2 children)

There would be no other incentive for companies to buy it.

A company might want to extend it's service offering with a build pipeline/CICD system, and buying GitLab would get them the best-in-class service.

Microsoft bought GitHub for much of the same reasons, and GitHub didn't went to hell after the acquisition.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago (2 children)

considering all GitHub projects (including private ones that didn't explicitly opt out) were used for training AI. GitHub absolutely went to hell after the acquisition. I would never use GitHub for this and many other reasons, and I will never again use GitLab if the same thing happens to it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Every open source license grants permission for AI training, and GitHub copilot by default rejects completions that exactly match code from its training. You can’t pretend to be pro-open source or pro-free software but at the same time be upset that people are using licensed software within its license terms.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If you use agplv3 for training your LLC, shouldn’t the code you spit out also be agplv3?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Only if you can reasonably argue that the output is the input (even with exact matches over a certain size being auto-rejected), and that it is enough to qualify as a copyrightable work. I’d argue line completions can never be enough to be copyrightable, and even a short function barely meets the bar unless it is considered creative in some way.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Not all projects on GitHub use the same open source license. I don't have a problem with scraping on projects that allow it. I have a problem with scraping on the ones that don't.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If a license forbids LLM training, it is by definition not open source.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Code being visible for anyone to see is open source. The license for that code has nothing to do with it. You're thinking of FOSS.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Incorrect. Open source means using a license that conforms to the open source definition. You can find that here: https://opensource.org/osd