Good to know that the prevailing commercial tech culture now sees plagiarism and stealing ideas without attribution as the modern way of doing business and hopes that dressing things up under some algorithmic veil will hide the act.
I guess the pit of moral decline has no bottom. The consolation is that theft has never been the road to wealth. Once the plundering is over the only thing that is left is a wasteland.
It seems that Microsoft has finally found a way to kill the open source "cancer".
I.e. what is being stolen without attribution? I'm genuinely not getting what you mean in this specific case.
It seems to me that such solutions are soon to be within the set potentially constructed by an LLM.
Let me break it down for you. If I ask for a visualization that squares the circle and there is one repo that has an example of squaring the circle, the LLM will "arrive" at a way of squaring the circle.
If (1) an LLM is able to arrive at solutions in the same class of difficulty as the solution for the target problem and (2) it's not possible to establish the provenance of the solution actually offered by the LLM, then what's the argument for assuming that the solution is based on IP rather than constructive reasoning?
Furthermore, it isn't theft to learn from others' work and reproduce similar qualities.