Comment by threecheese
11 hours ago
Do you think AGPL is going to stop a crawler from incorporating your work into their training set? I don’t. There are zero meaningful consequences atm.
That being said, I’m with you in spirit and in action, but realistically it’s pointless outside of living in accordance with your values.
Edit: Re-reading that, i just told you that your principles are pointless, and thats fucked up and wrong. I’m going to live in accordance with mine and not delete this, but apologies.
I don’t really care that the things I make will invariably be scooped up and ingested into the training data.
It’s rather that I think we all ought to stop making software that is primarily useful to businesses, because there is no more joy in that with AI-written PRs driving maintainers into burnout. Big tech finally has no more excuses as to why they don’t maintain all the bedrock libraries themselves. So I say, let them do that.
And on the other hand, since anyone can vibe code something now, the value of GitHub projects as CV material has gone down significantly, so I’d expect less people to do that. Good! Open Source as a community, as a movement, doesn’t need these people.
Let’s get back to the roots.
> the value of GitHub projects as CV material has gone down significantly, this might be true but the effect doesn't seem to translate, if you go by github difficulties to accomodate growth this past year, people are putting those vibe coded repos onto github, even if the signal vs noise ratio is much greater now, that only means you get more shitty repos vs non shitty now
That's kinda how I'm thinking about this in terms of licenzing my upcoming projects.
The code is just going to be laundered anyways, so why bother putting on a license like AGPL that might just hinder adoption?
I went through similar thoughts. Settled on just dropping everything under MIT.
I'm using AI assistance a bunch, nothing fully vibe coded (yet) so what's it really matter? My "novel" approach to BOM line item attributes?
Then just not publish it I think.
> Do you think AGPL is going to stop a crawler from incorporating your work into their training set?
No, but i propose we ostracize anyone who uses LLMs for the wrong reasons (i.e. not accessibility), and i hope you do too. The reasons are mostly not related to licenses, though, but it upholds licensing as a nice-to-have consequence.
(loved your comment edit)
Yeah, let’s go back to 1930 because if we cry wolf loud enough the wolf will disappear…? That it?
Doesn’t work like that. Better adapt and see how you can turn the tool to do your bidding rather than try to piss against the wind in the hope the wind changes direction the next 5 seconds. It won’t.
What a thread.
Maybe there is hope for the internet?