throwaway675309
Joined 8 years ago
Joined 8 years ago
I wouldn't have even brought it up if the artisanal declaration hadn't been explicitly called out.
I find the logic of AI art != okay, but AI code == okay, a bit inconsistent.
The trick is developing the intuition to know when to cut your losses early and instead of continuing to fight the LLM, just implement it yourself.
What is it about software development in particular that makes people so seemingly ethically unfettered by blatant plagiarism?
This argument gets repeated by every generation ad nauseam, even though they're oblivious to the fact that it keeps reoccurring. Everyone loves drawing an arbitrary line in the sand.
So let's take you, for example.
How far back did you start ? Did you write a basic HTML site in notepad?
Did you program your own TCP/IP stack?
Of course you at least configured the actual Web server using Apache on your Debian vps, right?
See how tired this argument is?
As for me, I just directly manipulate the platters of my hard drive using a magnetized needle to encode sequences of ones and zeros.
"Training" doesn't really have a well-defined meaning, I could use your website to train something as simple as a histogram of word counts for an AI for example. Nothing about that constitutes copyright infringement under even the loosest definition of their legal concept.
Additionally weights from training and the AI's output are two completely different matters from a legal perspective as well.