No way this will end badly, when Alphabet (!!!) had to issue bonds for the first time in its history.

In 2 years' time we will look back fondly at the Global Financial Crisis.

Hey, at least it's better than your other one.

https://landley.net/history/mirror/linux/kissedagirl.html

For whatever it's worth (perhaps not much?), I was actually asked about this three-decade-old post (!) recently on the Peterman Pod[0], which allowed for a slightly more nuanced discussion.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhSL-5GtmQM&t=3757s

Oh! This is a great explanation, thanks. I remember your original exchange (and I found it baffling and uncharacteristic), and I remember the William Shatner SNL Trek convention sketch, but I never made the connection between them.

I really can't think of a better way to respond to this situation. It is clear to me that over the next decade the amount of people who will have been hot-headed kids on the internet who grow up to fully-fledged adults who have said they no longer agree with things in ways that are not kind is going to be a lot higher. I've no doubt said things that I no longer agreed with that made sense in the context of when they were posted.

Thank you for being a good role model and setting the example that saying "that was bad, here is the context, but I don't like that I said that."

I forgot how much I hated the mixture of top and bottom quoting

Don't worry, big companies are doing similar things now.

Layoffs after the main activity period is over, laying off HR people after they held layoff meetings for other departments, etc.

Reptiles.

That argument is definitely BS, though.

What do you think happens in the most restrictive labor market in Europe? We're not slaves. There is a short notice period, usually 1 month or even shorter (notice periods for companies are longer, usually double or longer).

And if it's a bad job people just phone it in, take medical leave, etc during their notice period.

Hardly the end of the world to last 1 month.

The upside is that taking down Taiwan will be really hard. Fairly sure a lot of it is mountainous and forested and I think the strait is quite perilous.

So China might cripple Taiwan but invading it risks being their Vietnam.

That doesn't mean a war won't happen, people make stupid decisions all the time.

Once creation is commodotized, controlling eye balls is king. Look up aggregators. Apple, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon, etc.

If anything, in Extremistan we're all useless. Platforms and whales are all that matters.

Giant corporations started in the early 1600s and back then they had gunboats :-p

there were very few of them though. They constitute a far larger proportion of the economy now.

But LLMs do distribute the derived code they generate outside of their company. That's their entire point.

But wouldn't that be like some company using gpl licensed code to host a code generator for something? At least in a legal interpretation. Or is that different?

I mean, is the case you're making that you can run a SaaS business on GPL-derived code without fulfilling GPL obligations because you're not distributing a binary?

Yes, that's exactly what people do and did. That 'loophole' is the whole reason people came up with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Affero_General_Public_Lice...

I guess I am. I genuinly am just a layperson trying to look at what the law would say, so everything is speculation.

If true that would seem to invalidate the entire GPL, but even by that logic, a website (such as chatGPT) distributes javascript that runs the code, and programs like claude code also do so. Again, if you can slip the GPL's requirements through indirection like having your application go phone home to your server to go get the infringing parts, the GPL would essentially unenforceable in... most contexts

That's where the AGPL comes in. The GPL(v2) does not require eg Google or Facebook to release any of the changes they've made to the Linux kernel. That they do so is not because of a legal obligation to do so. The "to get parts" thing is the relevant detail to be very specific on. If those parts are a binary that is used, then the GPL does kick in, but for distributing source code that's possibly derived, possibly not covered by copyright, it's not been decided in a court of law yet.

And why would that be different or allowed? Sure, you get all the code you want, GPL licensed.

Everybody is trying to have their cake and eat it, too, by license laundering.

Heck, money laundering means you at least lose some of the money.

I have no idea. I genuinly was asking out of curiosity on what the law actually means for that while speculating.

Because OpenAI built their entire business around shamelessly scraping anything that had bits on it.

Maybe. But scraping isn't abuse. Seems a bit different?

Quoting the OP

> These checks are part of how we protect our first-party products from abuse like bots, scraping, fraud, and other attempts to misuse the platform.

That implies that OpenAI (or at least this employee) considers scraping abuse.

Given that the scraping doesn't do any rate limiting and pisses on robots.txt, yes it is abuse

Is there any evidence OpenAI has been ignoring robots.txt for scraping purposes? AFAIK the main sources of that traffic are still unknown.

The top comment categorized scraping as abuse ("abuse such as [...] scraping") - that's precisely why some accuse its author of lack of self awareness.

We only got PCs because IBM screwed up. Every other ecosystem is walled off to various degrees. And absolutely every current corp knows about IBMs failure and definitely does not want to repeat it.

Nintendo? Walled garden. Playstation? Walled garden. Mac/iOS? Walled garden? Clouds? Obviously walled gardens, the higher the walls the more advanced the services. SaaS? Walled gardens. Social media? Walled gardens.