• 1 Post
  • 596 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle
  • Both extremes are absolutely maddening here. I’m getting as sick of the anti-AI crowd as I am the vibe-code-tech-bros. At this point you could just put them all in a sack and start hitting them with sticks and wouldn’t care who got the worst of it.

    There’s a definite middle-ground here. Linus is one of the ultimate pragmatists and it shows here. It was helpful - so he used it. It helped you so you used it. I’ve found it to be incredibly helpful so I use it.

    Not all usages are equal just as all hand-written code is not equal. There are good ways to use these tools and bad ways. But the tools themselves are still just tools.


  • It’s a bit more interesting than that…

    Linux, unlike Windows, will let you delete a file that is actively in use. It removes the reference on the file system but the contents of the file won’t be deleted until all file pointers to it close. In fact it will still be seen as taking up disk space until it’s garbage collected (deleting a large file that’s in use can be frustrating).

    So the file is actually still available to that running process. If you replace it with a new executable and run that then you get the new version.












  • P2P torrent users are nothing like a code hosting platform. 🤣

    As has been said - their liability for llm code is no different from hosting any other code. They already have the same risk. And that is typically that they must respond to take-down notices which they are already doing.

    They are already dealing with all of the problems they would be dealing with with llm code.

    It’s just code puritanism wrapped in pseudo legal justification. Own it.



  • Yeah - it’s well known that scripts to automate doing bad things did not exist before llms.

    People have tried using forges to host explicitly illegal material all the time. Not just “this may be a copyright issue perhaps maybe”.

    The copyright complaint is a fig leaf to hide their shame.

    They also outright banned cryptocurrency code with no “copyright fig leaf” apologia.

    It’s code puritanism plain and simple. “We don’t like these things so we’re banning them.”


  • People can upload code that violates copyright too. No llm required.

    So if that is the concern have a rule about not violating copyright (which they may already have). And there is likely already a process for handling that.

    This is the problem I have with the situation: the solution chosen (banning llm code) doesn’t really address the concerns they’ve raised directly. It’s just apologetics to make it sound like it’s reason-based rather than “we don’t like it”.

    It’s their platform, they can do what they want, but let’s not pretend it’s not code-puritanism.