this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2026
54 points (96.6% liked)

Fuck AI

6252 readers
1161 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
VerbFlow@lemmy.world
MrMcGasion@lemmy.world
TootSweet@lemmy.world
BigMikeInAustin@lemmy.world
cynar@lemmy.world
drmeanfeel@lemmy.world
pavnilschanda@lemmy.world
CriticalMedicine@lemmy.world
WonderfulWanderer@lemmy.world
Communist@lemmy.ml
eatCasserole@lemmy.world
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
NutWrench@lemmy.world
Soup@lemmy.cafe
iAvicenna@lemmy.world
Tinks@lemmy.world
wizblizz@lemmy.world
corus_kt@lemmy.world
Prandom_returns@lemm.ee
JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
TrickDacy@lemmy.world
TheFriar@lemm.ee
ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com
HawlSera@lemm.ee
andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works
MeDuViNoX@sh.itjust.works
33550336@lemmy.world
Nougat@fedia.io
Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
Quill7513@slrpnk.net
glowing_hans@sopuli.xyz
e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de
ThefuzzyFurryComrade@pawb.social
54
"No right to relicense this project" - on changing the license of Mark Pilgrim's chardet from LGPL to MIT after a vibe-coded rewrite (github.com)
submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) by cypherpunks@lemmy.ml to c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world
8 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

for those not familiar with Mark Pilgrim, he is/was a prolific author, blogger, and hacker who abruptly disappeared from the internet in 2011.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.bestiver.se/post/968527

HN comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Grimy@lemmy.world -5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I think we may be mixing two different questions here.

The legal question is not whether an AI model might have seen the original code during training. The relevant question is whether the new implementation contains protected expression from the LGPL codebase.

At the moment, the available evidence points the other way:

reported similarity is extremely low (~0.04% average / ~1.29% max)

module structure and APIs differ

the detection pipeline appears to have been reimplemented

Solving the same problem (encoding detection) does not by itself make a work derivative.

Seems kind of fair. Codings has always been a bit of a wild west, are we going to start copyrighting concepts? The original repo wasn't used during the rewrite either.

I also prefer MIT to copy left in any case and I don't even think reverse engineering something and rewriting it is bad either. I don't dig the constant copyright bootlicking.

[โ€“] dogs0n@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 days ago

If you truly enjoy free software and the right to modify, then you enjoy copy left.

MIT is how you have your work "stolen" by people who hate freedoms and want to lock everything down.

I really think everyone using copyleft licenses is the correct future. Licensing with MIT has become very popular, but I don't think it should be.