@amszmidt@mastodon.socialThe way
#LLM are voiding classic
#copyleft has been experimentally demonstrated years ago, when
#GitHub #Copilot was
caught distributing well known
#AGPLv3 code with a permissive license and wrong author attribution.
Also, technically that incident demonstrated how Copilot's model itself is a derivative work of copylefted works: if a lossy compression of copyrighted material is still subject to authors'
#copyright, encoding such compression as arrays of floats that can be executed by virtual processors with a dedicated architecture (so called "inference" engines) does't change its nature of derivative work. Similarly violating copyrights of millions of authors at once doesn't free you of such rights.
That's basically why
#OpenAI and friends are so scared by current lack of sustainable business models for their
#LLM: they need money to keep Judges away.
But anyway I still have to find a single person that debate with technical competence and
in good faith the derivative nature of LLMs from the text corpora compressed in their models.
As for the Hacking License not being a Free Software license, it's debatable after a careful read since the only thing you cannot do with the software is to prevent others from enjoining the same freedom it grants you.
Yet I've never claimed it is Free Software because, sadly, I'm forced to move beyond Free Software by its own limit.
OTOH I'm proud that it's
not an
#OpenSource license as I'll never submit it to
#OSI corrupted
#gatekeepers.¹
As for
#FLOSS, it's
a term designed to confuse free software values with corporate propaganda while marginalizing hackers: its a leaking abstraction designed to fool developers and exploit their naive groupthinking. Having been fooled myself. Never again. 😉
____
¹ The way OSI tried to
#openwash the
#OSAID, with an over complicated process that doubled
#Meta's lobbyists' votes to exclude training data from the requirements confirmed my opinion about them.
@doctormo@floss.social
