Jérôme Gamez 🐘
daniel:// stenberg://"Our proprietary AI robots independently recreate any open source project from scratch"
they claim "Zero exposure to original source" but surely all popular Open Source projects have been read and parsed by every LLM in existence many times over
cλémentd
jan-erik
Tony Hoyle@clementd @bagder You'd think, but it follows on from his talk on it.. https://fosdem.org/2026/schedule/speaker/mike_nolan/
mossfet -> EMF 2026
Sébastien
Jim Fuller@bagder is copyright still a thing ... I thought it got blown up with llm ? lets wait till oracle database source is recreated ... maybe opinions will change.
d@nny disc@ mc²@jimfuller whoever told you that was misinformed
F4GRX Sébastien@jimfuller @bagder depends if you're rich.
Light@jimfuller
Bad news: FOSS code gets turned into proprietary code.
Good news: Source available and leaked proprietary code can be turned into FOSS code.
@bagder
Bad news: FOSS code gets turned into proprietary code.
Good news: Source available and leaked proprietary code can be turned into FOSS code.
@bagder
wifi_freak@bagder "Full legal indemnification*
*Through our offshore subsidiary in a jurisdiction that doesn't recognize software copyright"
Lol.
Stephane
Stefan Eissing@bagder On what did they train then? Proprietary sources? They need something, where is it from?
Ben Hardill@bagder So this is logical conclusion of the python chardet library re-license.
Getting a court to rule is probably the only way to get a answer one way or another, but getting the LLMs to say definitively what is in the training set will probably be hard (claimed trade secrets).
Even if it's satire it won't be long
Stadler BLÅHAJ Evo 
@bagder "If any of our liberated code is found to infringe on the original license, we'll provide a full refund and relocate our corporate headquarters to international waters.*
*This has never happened because it legally cannot happen. Trust us." and <all the testimonials' companies>
this seems like satire
*This has never happened because it legally cannot happen. Trust us." and <all the testimonials' companies>
this seems like satire
@bagder update: this is based on a talk from FOSDEM 2026, which, slop being used (mostly for slides) for the purpose of satire aside, is actually a quite nice talk
so yeah, I would say that this is most likely satire
Gina Häußge@bagder I sure as fuck hope so, because that page makes me sick.
Aljoscha Rittner (beandev)
Ben Ramsey
sotolf@ramsey @beandev @foosel @bagder
The Testemonials did it for me, it's a very convincing satire, the names and companies are quite amusing.
@foosel @ramsey @beandev @bagder
Yeah, but it probably shouldn't say "report:verified" in the corner then, unless of course it's real slop, almost all the links on the bottom of the page links to nothing as well (https://malus.sh/#) so either it's very sloppy stuff or it's a scarily real-looking satire.
@sotolf @ramsey @beandev @bagder The sad thing is that we have to actually wonder if that might be real. A couple years ago I'd have gone "haha, sure", but with all the greed and end stage capitalism we find ourselves in, I wouldn't be surprised if something like that actually turned out to be real.
ShadSterling
Wouter@bagder Their blog: "Some will argue that what we do is exploitative, that we are extracting the ideas from open source while leaving behind the people who contributed them. To this I say: yes, that is a reasonably accurate description of our business model. It is also a reasonably accurate description of [...] virtually every company that has ever used open source software. We are simply being honest about it, and charging a fee for the privilege."
Must be satire indeed
Alyssa Coghlan
Andrew Nesbitt@bagder are you saying that Dr. Heinrich Offshore isn’t a real person?!
Sean Gillies@bagder It's good satire. I'm glad you boosted it.
synlogic4242@bagder I thought HAL was merely dark satire... until I used Gemini heavily in 2025
@bagder The "Through our offshore subsidiary in a jurisdiction that doesn't recognize software copyright" asterisk is just *chef's kiss*
Anton
trenchworms@bagder Actually, bear with me here.
1. Live somewhere that is functionally immune from civil suits from "big" countries.
2. Promise to license-liberate these big companies.
3. Give them the exact code without the license doc itself.
4. Let them include the "safe" code in their proprietary codebase.
5. Report them for license violations.
Joe Brockmeier@bagder I think it sprang from this at FOSDEM: https://fosdem.org/2026/schedule/event/SUVS7G-lets_end_open_source_together_with_this_one_simple_trick/
Or is related to it, anyway...
Xela
chebra@bagder But this one isn't https://gnomestarterpack.com
beaiouns 
mhoye
Azuaron
Fabio G.
Hugh@bagder This was satire (as far as I could tell); I attended the talk at FOSDEM: https://fosdem.org/2026/schedule/event/SUVS7G-lets_end_open_source_together_with_this_one_simple_trick
Jocelynephiliac 
@bagder oh thank god
Timo TijhofThe "$0 Attribution Given" proud metric is what gave it away for me. Good one!
FediThing 
@bagder "never seen the source", right.
@bagder I can't see that passing a legal test, but it'll probably take a few cases.
And why only open source? If it's that legally effective recreating Windows would be high on the list. Of course that'd get them sued by Microsoft, so maybe they're not so sure about their claims after all..
Carsten@bagder the AI bros are just trolling us now
O'Schell
antsu
veeso
Barry Rowlingson@bagder April 1st gets earlier every year, right?
Olivier LeroyI also got tricked until I read the "AGPL contamination" snippet:)