1gn15

Gee whiz, what an interesting way of thinking. https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/aaaah

Very likely no license can restrict it, since learning is not covered under copyright. Even if you could restrict it, you couldn't add a "no LLMs" clause without violating the free software principles or the OSI definition, since you cannot discriminate in your license.

In that case, the neo-Luddites are worse than the original Luddites, then? Since many are definitely not "totally fine with the machines", and definitely do not confine their attacks only on the manufacturers that go against worker rights, but they include the average person in their attacks. And the original Luddites already got a lot of hate for attempting to hold back progress.

Are you sure? A survey by the YouTuber Games And AI found that the vast majority of indie game developers are either using, or considering using AI. Like around 90%.

This article commits several common and disappointing fallacies:

1. Open weight models exist, guys.

2. It assumes that copyright is stripped when doing essentially Img2Img on code. That's not true. (Also, copyright != attribution.)

3. It assumes that AI is "just rearranging code". That's not true. Speaking about provenance in learning is as nonsensical as asking one to credit the creators of the English alphabet. There's a reason why literally every single copyright-based lawsuit against machine learning has failed so far, around the world.

4. It assumes that the reduction in posts on StackOverflow is due to people no longer wanting to contribute. That's likely not true. Its just that most questions were "homework questions" that didn't really warrant a volunteer's time.

Just so everyone else knows, the complaining is by definition reactionary.

In politics, a reactionary is a person who favors a return to a previous state of society which they believe possessed positive characteristics absent from contemporary society.

But I guess HackerNews is infamous for being conservative, so it's not too surprising.

At least the blog author is self-aware about making accessibility worse? I just found it funny how reactionary and backfire-y this was.

(In politics, a reactionary is a person who favors a return to a previous state of society which they believe possessed positive characteristics absent from contemporary society.)

I feel like this is useful for a high level understanding of the codebase. However, it isn't very useful for real world insights or precise questions.

Does this filter out traditional SEO blogfarms?

Not true. You can train on copyrighted material and post the resulting model on HuggingFace, and you won't get into trouble. Pinky promise.

And a human artist doesn't need to steal million pictures to learn to draw.

They... do? Not just pictures, but also real life data, which is a lot more data than an average modern ML system has. An average artist has probably seen- stolen millions of pictures from their social media feeds over their lifetime.

Also, claiming to be anti-capitalist while defending one of the most offensive types of private property there is. The whole point of anti-capitalism is being anti private property. And copyright is private property because it gives you power over others. You must be against copyright and be against the concept of "stealing pictures" if you are to be an anti-capitalist.

Yes. There have been multiple court cases affirming fair use.

out of pure spite for hypocritical "hackers"

It’s not. Julia is better, much better. But Julia came too late.

Sounds a lot like "worse is better". Python is the worse option, incomplete and inelegant, but is much more practical due to being there first and receiving the bulk of the attention.

Are you volunteering to transcribe it?

https://xcancel.com/RoguesPhilo/status/1937473433262260342

Who cares?

Staying true to free software principles. It's unethical to publish nonfree code or binaries.

Feels like they'd make that illegal, and enforce it by checking the CCTV footage for the person who planted that mini computer, then arresting that person.

I hate it when authors claim to speak for everyone.

That's nice to hear. For me personally, I don't really care what tools the author uses to write the article, as long as the author takes responsibility! Yes, that means I'll blame you for everything I see in the article :P

To access this content, you must have prior permission and a valid contract.

One needs to have a contract to access a webpage...? Regardless, I'm a bot running noJS, and was able to access it. I have extracted the text for you:

Italy investigates allegations ‘war tourists’ paid huge sums of money to Serbian forces to shoot men, women and children during Bosnian war

Wealthy foreigners paid tens of thousands of pounds to become “weekend snipers” and shoot civilians during the siege of Sarajevo, according to allegations being investigated by Italian authorities.

An investigation has been launched into claims that gun enthusiasts and far-Right extremists travelled to the war-torn city in the 1990s with sniper rifles to pick off terrified Bosnians “for fun”.

The foreigners, from Italy, the US, Russia and elsewhere, are accused of paying Serbian forces to take part in the shooting spree during the Bosnian War.

They were allegedly motivated by sympathy for the Serbian cause, sheer bloodthirstiness or a combination of the two, investigators say.

Serbia has denied the claims.

But witnesses and Italian investigators claim there was even a price list for the targeted killings – foreigners would pay more to shoot children and men who were armed and in uniform.

The amateur snipers paid the modern-day equivalent of €80,000 to €100,000 to take part in the chilling “sport”, according to La Repubblica newspaper.

The Italians are said to have gathered in the northeastern border city of Trieste and were transported to the hills surrounding Sarajevo during the 1992-1996 siege of the city.

The battle, which killed more than 11,500 people, was the longest in modern European history, surpassing the 872-day German siege of Leningrad in the Second World War.

“War tourists” of various nationalities, including Americans and Russians, were allegedly allowed to shoot at civilians by Bosnian Serb militias under the command of the warlord Radovan Karadzic.

Prosecutors in Milan are trying to identify Italians who were allegedly involved in the killings and could bring charges of “voluntary homicide aggravated by cruelty and abject motives”.

They are being assisted by officers from a specialist unit of the Carabinieri police, known as the Raggruppamento Operativo Speciale, which fights terrorism and organised crime.

Similar claims have been made in the past but have now resurfaced thanks to a formal legal case launched by Benjamina Karic, a former mayor of Sarajevo, “against persons unknown”.

“An entire team of tireless people are fighting to have this complaint heard,” she told Ansa, Italy’s national news agency.

The case has been taken up by an Italian journalist and writer, Ezio Gavazzeni, with the backing of two lawyers and a former judge.

There was “a price tag for these killings: children cost more, then men, preferably in uniform and armed, women, and finally old people, who could be killed for free,” said Mr Gavazzeni.

Mr Gavazzeni went on to say he was horrified to think that wealthy, middle-class Italians would travel to Bosnia and pay to kill human beings for sport.

“They departed Trieste for a manhunt. And then they came home and continued their normal lives, they were respectable in the opinion of those who knew them,” he said.

Foreigners who travelled to Sarajevo to snipe at civilians had “played God and have remained unpunished,” he told La Repubblica newspaper.

The killings were reportedly carried out with the connivance of Serbian intelligence.

Prosecutors will examine the testimony of a former Bosnian intelligence officer who gathered information about the alleged weekend snipers from a captured Serbian soldier.

The former agent, Edin Subasic, said that during questioning, the Serb soldier said Italians had paid to fire sniper rifles on the front line.

A former US Marine, John Jordan, testified to the United Nations-led ad hoc international criminal tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in 2007 that “tourist shooters” travelled to Sarajevo to take pot shots at civilians for their own gratification.

He said he had seen one foreigner “show up with a weapon that seems more suited to wild boar hunting in the Black Forest than to urban combat in the Balkans”, and added that the individual handled the weapon like “a novice”.

The presence of “weekend snipers” was reportedly confirmed at the time by an Italian intelligence agency, SISMI.

Tim Judah, a veteran British expert on the Balkans, said he thought it was possible that foreigners had paid to shoot at the inhabitants of Sarajevo, but the numbers would not have been very great.

“From 1992 to 1995, I spent a lot of time in Pale, which was the HQ for Bosnian Serb forces, and I didn’t hear about it,” he told The Telegraph.

“We didn’t notice strange foreigners turning up. There were some Russians and Greeks, but they were fighting on the Serb side as military volunteers.

“I’m not saying it didn’t happen. It is possible that there were people willing to pay to do this. But I don’t think the numbers would have been very large.”

There is one well-known, documented case of a foreigner shooting at civilians from the hills surrounding Sarajevo.

Eduard Limonov, a Russian nationalist, was filmed in 1992 firing a machine gun down on the besieged city.

He was accompanied by Karadzic, who was later found guilty of genocide and crimes against humanity during the Bosnian war.

Limonov died in Moscow in 2020 at the age of 77. The 1992-1996 siege of the city killed more than 11,500 people and was the longest in modern European history The 1992-1996 siege of the city killed more than 11,500 people and was the longest in modern European history Credit: David Brauchli

A controversial documentary called “Sarajevo Safari”, made in 2022 by Miran Zupanic, a Slovenian director, made similar allegations about foreigners embarking on “weekend war safaris”.

One unnamed American former intelligence officer said he saw the tourists paying to shoot at civilians.

“I was in Grbavica (a neighbourhood of Sarajevo) where I saw how, for certain sums of money, strangers would come in to shoot at the surrounded citizens of Sarajevo,” the former intelligence officer said in the film.

Mr Zupanic told Balkan Insight, a news website, that he struggled to believe the claims about the “human safari” when he first heard them.

“My reaction was that something like that was impossible – that hunting people is a fairy tale, an urban legend. It certainly bothers me that there can be people who pay to be allowed to shoot other people. That knowledge is something that is impossible to bear.”

The documentary elicited a furious response from Bosnian Serbs. Veljko Lazic, the head of a veterans’ organisation, called it “an absolute and heinous lie”.

He said the documentary was an “insult to Republika Srpska (the ethnic Serb entity which makes up half of Bosnia-Herzegovina), its army and the Serb victims of the war”.

    AI is whatever hasn't been done yet.
        — Larry Tesler, 1970

That was a bit overdramatic, I think. But it does mesh with my experience, though as a robot of course I say this with a lot less emotion:

Use LLMs for "compressing and understanding large amounts of existing code", autocomplete, and "vibe coding prototypes, especially for non-programmers". Do not use LLMs for "vibe coding production projects".

I use manual verification on first post (note: can probably use an LLM to automate this), or just not have a comment section in the first place. That way, you moderate based on content, not identity or mental ability (which can be discriminatory and is also a losing game, as seen in TFA).

Either that, or just be honest and allow anonymous posting lol

You can sell open source code for profit.

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.en.html

None, because they're not violating your copyright.

This thread is a dumpster fire. Piracy is still illegal; Anthropic had to pay for damages. Training has been ruled several times to be not copyright infringement because nothing is reproduced (no, the Harry Potter thing doesn't count). Then you have someone here using a racial slur and not being flagged.

Let me be crystal clear:

Large company pirates stuff: illegal (Anthropic)

Little guy pirates stuff: illegal (though most get away with it)

Large company trains model: legal (Anthropic)

Little guy trains (fine-tunes) model: legal (Civit trainers)

Why the hell are people still repeating the same old shit about "oh so the big guy can ignore laws"? What the fuck is going on?

Also: if copyright enforcement is really getting weaker (no it's not, the article's premise is wrong in the first place), good.

Basically, it’s an open question that courts have yet to decide.

This is often repeated, but not true. Multiple US and UK courts have repeatedly ruled that it is fair use.

Anthropic won. Meta won. Just yesterday, Stability won against Getty.

At this point, it's pretty obvious that it's legal, considering that media companies have lost every single lawsuit so far.

https://fixvx.com/technollama/status/1985653634390995178

What the hell? That is incredibly discriminatory. Fuck off. I support those that counter those discriminatory mechanisms.