Has that caused problems? I don’t really care if they are just using AI. If they are breaking things because of it and not validating anything then that is a larger concern.
Slop code can’t be licensed, the license Lutris had is invalid. That means you can’t even fork it unless you can identify the point slop started and fork prior to that.
There’s no guarantee the developer who uses slop code even knows what it’s doing. Github is full of nonsense like that now.
That part isn’t true whatsoever. Public domain doesn’t work like a poison pill. If I put the collected works of Arthur Conan Doyle on my website, that doesn’t mean the site can’t be CC BY-SA 4.0; it means someone is free to take that specific part without worrying about CC BY-SA 4.0.
Even for the slop code where it’s more mixed in, it’s on the person trying to take it to affirmatively show the part they’re taking was generated by an LLM, i.e. you can’t just say “this is slop, I’m taking this” and expect a project to have to affirmatively defend that it’s human-written.
And lastly, AI assistance doesn’t automatically even poison the code being created/changed with it. This one is murky, but so far, the general consensus is that so long as you, the human, worked on it – i.e. that you didn’t just let the slop machine run wild and take whatever it outputted without your own changes – it’s still your copyright.
Dev shit all over it with AI slop code
Has that caused problems? I don’t really care if they are just using AI. If they are breaking things because of it and not validating anything then that is a larger concern.
Even if it runs fine there are still problems
That part isn’t true whatsoever. Public domain doesn’t work like a poison pill. If I put the collected works of Arthur Conan Doyle on my website, that doesn’t mean the site can’t be CC BY-SA 4.0; it means someone is free to take that specific part without worrying about CC BY-SA 4.0.
Even for the slop code where it’s more mixed in, it’s on the person trying to take it to affirmatively show the part they’re taking was generated by an LLM, i.e. you can’t just say “this is slop, I’m taking this” and expect a project to have to affirmatively defend that it’s human-written.
And lastly, AI assistance doesn’t automatically even poison the code being created/changed with it. This one is murky, but so far, the general consensus is that so long as you, the human, worked on it – i.e. that you didn’t just let the slop machine run wild and take whatever it outputted without your own changes – it’s still your copyright.
—someone who doesn’t do slop
Don’t all the big software companies use AI, are you suggesting that everything actually has an invalid licence?