cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/44059976
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/44059967
for those not familiar with Mark Pilgrim, he is/was a prolific author, blogger, and hacker who abruptly disappeared from the internet in 2011.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.bestiver.se/post/968527
The AI-rewrite should be considered a derivative, & therefore subject to the parent-license, I believe.
Except that AI doesn’t have any right to copyright, & therefore to licensing.
Which means that it’s just an illegal derivative made by a tool.
_ /\ _
Not sure why downvoted, this is the correct take
AI Bros are fucking wild.
This whole “we don’t want the GPL” movement is ridiculous. The modern open source ecosystem exists because of the GPL, and moving away from it means rapid reversion to straight up theft of code by big corporations.
Not to mention permissive licensing legally allows a project to go closed-source, effectively rugpulling its userbase, with no recourse.
I keep pushing this as an example, but imagine Bluesky corporate closed-sourcing ATproto and paywalling third-party and self-hosted PDSes once they run out of VC funding and need to start turning a profit somehow, since ATproto is permissively licensed rather than being copyleft licensed, they could do that.
By contrast, copyleft licenses ban this type of rugpulling and GPL3 calls out and bans tivoization (what RH does with the RHEL EULA) by name.
Even more ridiculous when they vibe code to do it
Anything “vibe coded” is almost certainly stealing GPL code. Not like the industry hasn’t been doing that for years, but now they don’t even need to hire engineers to steal the code, they just close their eyes and pretend it’s all their own.
