graemep

German copyright works a bit different from US copyright, as it requires a "personal intellectual creation"

Can you explain how it is different from US law? It sounds closer to US law than to, for example, British law.

You can find the original (German) verdict

I cannot read German. So you are saying Bird & Bird's explanation of the ruling is wrong? Or is it contradicted by other cases?

Virtually all desktop Linux users do. The biggest exception is AUR as its not vetted.

It does not prove anything. Some could not commit those files to avoid detection, and those files exist in projects in which only some code is AI generated. I have them in projects where, for example, LLMs were used to generate tests and for a few fixes/additions in the rest of the code.

That is not what their wording says. They could have said "code that is mostly covered by copyright under German law", but they chose to say 'mostly consist of code written by "generative AI"-tools'.

Also, if you are a non-German user of Codeberg and there is a wide difference between what is covered by copyright in your country and Germany (e.g. if you are British) this might make Codeberg less of a suitable choice for you. What copyright laws matter to a particular user? Their country, the US because of its dominance and reach, or some sort of global safe/effective compromise?

This has the feel of being done by people who do not understand how to work things to be clear legally, nor of an understanding of the consequences.

It depends what you mean by "AI authored". If you mean one-shotted vide code, then yes. If you mean someone providing detailed instructions for architecture and functionality and reviewing the code, then it does have a lot of value.

I agree in principle and there are many examples of it.

I just do not think that banning non ECC is an example of nanny statism.

copyright doesn't suddenly get declared as being of the model owner

That does not seem to be likely. The article you link indicates it is the prompter and provider of any other inputs (in the case discussed the photographer who took the photo the LLM modified) who might have claims.

The US specifically has settled on it being (effectively?) public domain.

My understanding is that sufficient human input makes it copyright. This is not greatly different from German law.

In both cases something that is vibe coded in the strict sense of having only vague prompts will not be covered by copyright, something with real human input will.

That leads to a problem with "mostly" there. Does it mean mostly vibe coded, or mostly AI written? AI written under close guidance is covered by copyright so should be fine.

This does make it important to keep prompt history and record human edits of generated code as that is what will prove sufficient human input.

Also, its not just German law that matters to users. For many users law in their jurisdiction is what matters.

No one forces them to increase manufacturing output. They do it to make money, just like everyone else.

People can and should be educated -- and expected -- to make their own decisions about things like whether they need ECC RAM.

So you think its realistic to expect the average consumer to assess the pros and cons of using ECC RAM?

We could solve this by better information which addresses your concerns about it being nanny statism. We would need it to be something that consumers understand - e.g. We could require all computers without ECC RAM to have a warning label saying something like "this computer uses cheap memory so is prone to crashing and losing your data". I strongly suspect the impact of that would be very similar to that of just banning non-ECC RAM.

I would also argue that having reliable RAM is a reasonable extension of existing legal requirements for consumer products: e.g. that they are of satisfactory quality and fit for purpose (to use the current UK terminology).

Seatbelts and working brakes are not an absolute protection either, but i still want them.

ECC RAM is not needed for every application and mandating it for every gaming rig and machine used to run Chrome will just increase prices unnecessarily.

The price increase will be very small if manufacturers are no longer able to segment the market to make a higher margin on those who need it. No one wants even games or web browsers to crash randomly.

If they want to eat that cost, it should be up to them.

They need to be given the choice. Most people do not know they even have the choice, and they are not offered it at a reasonable price.

A cost to people in general is a cost to society.

If you are not going to quote people accused of (or even known to be guilty of) sexual misconduct that covers a lot of authors and creative people in general.

Its not required reading in the UK and I still read Twain, as did my kids.

So your American Homer’s legacy perhaps lies buried down in some unmarked indigenous grave.

There are probably people similar to Homer in someways. However, the thing about Homer is that he influenced literature across most of Europe, North Africa, and much of the Middle East. I do not think any one culture in North America had the wide influence the Greeks did.

Homer was 2k years ago.

Almost 3k years ago, and very likely to have just written down an existing oral tradition that could be much older. The historical events on which the story is based are about a half millennium earlier than Homer.

The British government switched most things available to the public over to ODF (the exception I have noticed is ONS stats in excel) years ago.

I suspect they still use MS formats internally though.

If you are an individual, almost certainly, unless you are using LLMs very heavily.

If you are a business employing many people all of who use LLMs reasonably heavily? You can still spread the hardware cost over many users and respond to multiple prompts in parallel. At some point buying the hardware will make sense.

I would not get a dedicated server to run a single small VPS. On the other hand if I needed a lot of capacity a dedi is cheaper than a big VPS (or lots of small ones).

There is also a benefit for anyone who has confidential or secret information.

Someone living in India would have to follow Indian court orders regardless of where their domain was registered.

Another TLD would mean obeying laws and court orders in another country as well

The thing you are skipping over there is not whether China is safe, but whether open weights are open source.

That is not a good analogy. Scotland voluntarily formed a union with the rest of the UK and played a disproportionate role in colonialism. Ireland would be a better one.

The weakness in the GP's argument is that Russia is not the Soviet Union, nor is it communist.

The CCP is the same government responsible for lifting historically unprecedented numbers of people out of abject poverty.

The CCP also put most of those people into such abject poverty from the 50s onwards. They give up on communism and thereby reversed the problems caused by communism like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward

Didn't they bring hundreds of millions out of poverty, and built amazing cities and facilities in the past 30 years?

A lot of that was the result of stopping doing the damage they had done in previous five decades that resulted in such a high proportion of their population living in poverty.

That is the point. You can create the list openly and without fear.

You can create a long list of Chinese atrocities, but mentioning even one will get you into a lot of trouble.

Yes, but those laws are pretty effective. They do deter murderers and thieves, and take them out of society so they cannot repeat their offences.

Ill thought out regulations can make things worse - I am convinced this is the case for the UK's Online Safety Act, for example. That (and the proposed ban on social media for under 16s) is also promoted on "we must do something" grounds.

I am very much in favour of some proposed changes under the law - e.g. improving repairability and reusability of some product categories.

I have doubts that some discouragement of destruction of new products fixes the big underlying problem with clothing: the production of cheap junk not designed to last. Under these regulations (at least as summarised in the article), they offer it to charity, charity rejects it, then they are free to destroy it.

That culture varies a lot between countries, but they share a direction of travel.

a collective entity

IMO is likely to create more bureaucracy rather than less. I am convinced it is impossible without a common identity and culture.

immigrants actually might help breaking up this course of things: as people with no built up wealth and much less to lose, they might be willing to work harder and risk more

Possibly, but only the first generation. Not even them in countries (the UK does this, I am sure other countries do too) that strongly favour immigrants with money or who are highly skilled.

On the other hand, I think one of the advantages the US has over Europe is its ability to attract high skilled immigrants.

I agree we should, but that does not mean that a particular regulation is the right way to do it. Its very hard to close loopholes and exploitation of exemptions.

The author wants to blame immigrants.

I do not think it is fragmented culture either. There is no clear patter of bigger being better. I think it is complacency, bad government, and a decline in efficiency. I do agree it is endogenous.

Its been clear what he is politically since his "London is not white enough" post. He has only got worse since

I have not used lightning but I have found USB C to be much more fragile than USB A, although better than mini and micro. I would really rather have had evey thing be a few mm bigger and stick with A.

Someone I know woke up this morning to over 3 trillion dollars.

Love to see how hyperscalers make your life easier and less worrying.

But also, there were plenty of Christian and Catholic Nazi.

The Catholic Church condemned Nazi ideology in the 1930s and said racism is incompatible with Christianity. The story of the papal encyclical is quite interesting. Lots of priests ended up in prisons of concentration camps.

The Nazis were determined to specifically get rid of Christian values. They invented two new religions to try and replace it: Nazi neo-paganism and Positive Christianity.

Hitler was not a historian and hugely misinterpreted history, but the Nazi view of Sparta was not just a myth. Sparta was literally a society based on a racial hierarchy, with the Spartans structuring their society around keeping control of the helots.