Programming

26193 readers

189 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

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 !webdev@programming.dev

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

snowe@programming.dev

Ategon@programming.dev

UlrikHD@programming.dev

bugsmith@programming.dev

Spyro@programming.dev

129

LLM Code and FOSS licenses are in conflict. (youtu.be)

submitted 1 day ago by Gonzako@lemmy.world to c/programming@programming.dev

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 5 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] fubarx@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Fascinating talk.

According to the U.S. copyright office and Library of Congress, copyrighted works require a 'human' element: https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10922

If art generated by AI can not be copyrighted, it may well extend to AI-generated code. If so, the implications could be pretty far-reaching.

The one, practical use-case of AI that has found 'product market fit' so far has been using AI for coding. Companies are encouraging it. Developers (including experienced ones) are starting to use more of it. But if it turns out none of the generated output can be copyrighted, then you lose all the commercial users who are the revenue sources for all these tools and companies.

This talk feels like it's touching on a pretty important topic.

[–] abbadon420@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

To be fair, this doesn't mean you can't use AI as a tool. An artist or a software developer can generate things with AI and orchestrate the pieces to become a new whole. That whole could still be copyrighted.

[–] tabular@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

In that case the "orchestrate the pieces" part is copyrightable if it reaches a minimum threshold of creativity but the pieces themselves are still not copyrightable because a human still didn't make them??

[–] ell1e@leminal.space 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Some highlights from this talk: https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy-docs/issues/413#issuecomment-4105667974 Quote: "Obvious, this is a copyright infringement."

[–] xthexder@l.sw0.com 2 points 1 day ago

This was linked in the discussion there, and I think I'm a fan: https://sciactive.com/human-contribution-policy/

I'm definitely considering adding something like this to my projects.