News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The State of GPL Propagation to AI Models. Parent comment

Re:The State of GPL Propagation to AI Models by palata on Thursday November 27, 2025 @09:43AM (#46069686)
But then we would need a way to prove that some code was LLM generated, right?

Like if I copy-paste GPL-licenced code, the way you realise that I copy-pasted it is because 1) you can see it and 2) the GPL-licenced code exists. But when code is LLM generated, it is "new". If I claim I wrote it, how would you oppose that?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The State of GPL Propagation to AI Models by chii on Thursday November 27, 2025 @11:49PM (#46075607)
you could have the inverse - proof that the code was _not_ LLM generated. It's like a mark of origin/country of origin for produce.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The State of GPL Propagation to AI Models by palata on Friday November 28, 2025 @04:33AM (#46077109)
How would you do it? How can you prove that the message you sent was not LLM generated?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The State of GPL Propagation to AI Models by chii on Friday November 28, 2025 @04:52AM (#46077214)
The same way a current product advertises itself as hand-crafted, or organic, etc. Just pure trust. And if you can charge a higher price because this is considered valuable by your customers, then you get to sustain it as a business.
[ Parent | on HN ]