Mastodawn

This case shows how Open Source will die. With anyone just being able to pipe existing code and tests through an LLM and claiming that to be "clean room" (which is hogwash) no licensing can protect your work from being accumulated and monetized by anyone. The commons are actively being shredded in front of our eyes.

https://github.com/chardet/chardet/pull/322

chardet 7.0: ground-up MIT-licensed rewrite by dan-blanchard · Pull Request #322 · chardet/chardet

Summary This PR is for a ground-up, MIT-licensed rewrite of chardet. It maintains API compatibility with chardet 5.x and 6.x, but with 27x improvements to detection speed, and highly accurate suppo...

GitHub

Show thread

Thomas Depierre Mar 6

@tante i don't like it but... I think it is pretty separated from open source dying.

Open source exist because i want to put my stuff up available without consequences. That crap doesn't change it.

Show thread

River

@Di4na @tante I'd argue open source is about more than just the right/ability to *host* my code/software.

To me, it necessarily must also mean that there's a community out there that can maintain good projects (e.g. the Linux Kernel) and keep them from being swallowed by proprietary aquisitions¹.

Open source requires a legal basis that can help a project maintain its status and license. Contributors shouldn't have to worry about possible re-licensing attempts 10 years down the line.

A contributor should have reasonable assurances that the project they contribute to isn't going to somehow utilize those contributions towards a differently licensed², AI-sloppified version of what you wrote, with your copyright ownership conveniently stripped of you.

---

¹ Wouldn't Android just love to move all development of Linux over to a closed-source repo? Or to have their own specially modified version of it by forking an MIT-licensed version, instead of needing to comply with the GPL license?

² differently licensed using a new license that is incompatible with the original. Especially damning with LGPL -> MIT, where the terms are massively weakened in the re-license.

Show thread

Thomas Depierre Mar 6

@riverpunk @tante I understand you.

I also... How to tell you. That community part? It is incredibly rare. On average and even on p95, OpenSource is just one person.

I get that it is not the ethos and ideology you may have. That is fair and good. Keep up the fight.

But it is also not out current reality