(no title)
feelandcoffee | 2 years ago
Let's say you've been working in place A, you show your code to an LLM service (like the dozen or so Copilot-like services) and tell them to refactor. And for the sake of argument, let's say the LLM uses your code and questions for its next training dataset.
A few years pass, then you go to work at Place B, and ask a question that happens to be related to the problem that Place A's code solved, and they give you Place A's code as is.
sircastor|2 years ago
Incidental to that, I feel like these tools expose the reality behind “copyrighting code/math” and how fallacious it is. If the tool can generate the efficient methods of achieving a result, I think it becomes obvious that one shouldn’t be able to protect it via IP law.
dylan604|2 years ago
Silhouette|2 years ago
But these kinds of tools can only do that because someone else already put in the work to write the solutions that are used to train their models. Isn't this exactly the kind of situation when copyright is supposed to apply?
treprinum|2 years ago
bennyg|2 years ago
thfuran|2 years ago
Why does that only hold when the result in question is in software? Machines are just tools for achieving results.
ekianjo|2 years ago
two_in_one|2 years ago
sillysaurusx|2 years ago