News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Ownership of AI-Generated Code Hotly Disputed. Parent comment

Re:Ownership of AI-Generated Code Hotly Disputed by Filligree on Friday December 30, 2022 @11:34AM (#34186614)
It sounds like nonsense. The most plausible solution would be to provide credit to every single author whose code was used in the original training set; of course, that would run into gigabytes just for the credits.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ownership of AI-Generated Code Hotly Disputed by varjag on Friday December 30, 2022 @11:55AM (#34186875)
And…? I think my last Xcode update was 20+ Gb.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ownership of AI-Generated Code Hotly Disputed by Filligree on Friday December 30, 2022 @12:18PM (#34187160)
Personally, I don't want minimalistic programs to start taking 20+GB! Xcode's bloat isn't a goal to strive for.

If such a giant list of acknowledgements were to be included, would it even help anyone, in any way? It sounds like pure inefficiency.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ownership of AI-Generated Code Hotly Disputed by logicallee on Friday December 30, 2022 @12:53PM (#34187603)
But GPL requires the resulting derivative code to be open-sourced under GPL, not just attributed. So if you did that then copilot could only emit code under a GPL license. Maybe that is okay, but it is not what copilot is trying to do at the moment. (And not everyone wants to open-source all their code under GPL.)
[ Parent | on HN ]