🔎 If you see an alert for analytics.usips.org, this is a self-hosted system I am running as a test. It is GDPR compliant and collects no invasive information.
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading. Create account
I remember when lunduke asked him a hypothetical, if he would write proprietary software or let his child starve to death and he said that he would let his child starve to death
I remember when lunduke asked him a hypothetical, if he would write proprietary software or let his child starve to death and he said that he would let his child starve to death
Most projects are permissively licensed nowadays and they often can't link GPL code.
If all open source code was GPL then my biggest complaint would be resolved but it's not.
Most projects are permissively licensed nowadays and they often can't link GPL code.
If all open source code was GPL then my biggest complaint would be resolved but it's not.
Isn't the issue with GPL the whole v3 tivoization clause and how GPL v2 only is the only GPL variant that doesn't have that bullshit, which is why Linus loves it so much, refuses to re-license Linux under anything else and is the reason why corpos want to contribute to it instead of avoiding it like fire?
Local Gemma 4 didn't fuss about it, but it wanted to delegate the image edit to non-existant DALL-E.
Same with Qwen 3.8. Guess it would do it if I had DALL-E integration set up in LM Studio. It still shows the importance of local models. Things that run on your hardware, that you control. Even if it is a black box you can't peek into, it's your black box, under your command.
Big companies that allow their engineers to spend time on projects require it be on non-gpl products. Therefore there exist, in decent number, projects that avoid and can't link to gpl'ed code. Just because you imagine your wife's son every time you think about software licenses doesn't change Google's corporate policy.
I am 100% on the Xorg side, but this entire conflict undermines the entire Linux ecosystem. Whatever else is wrong with Windows, it's basic ability to drive displays in a GUI is not one of them. A series of autistic retards have made stubborn consequential decisions for this ecosystem that have divided the userbase in large part because the upgrade ended up just being a competitor controlled by someone else. SystemD, Wayland, Gnome, the big distros, the big corporate backers, fuck 'em all.
Even the other discussion about licenses--gpl3 split the ecosystem with the fucking kernel. Maybe if Hurd were a thing that wouldn't matter. The bottom line is the Linux ecosystem has blundered its way to where it kind of actually belongs: the server OS that drives the Internet and dev workstations for power users. Most of you wouldn't want a flood of normies. Look at the Internet itself.
And it generated something completely different from the initial input. You could try something like Mage Flow or do a little bit of inpainting for more controlled intent. Still, the image edit models I don't like all that much, they seem to completely lose track of the colors even if you're restricting it to a masked area, and if you let them off the least they'll just come up with something completely different. I tried Mage Flow and it gave me a variety of results that strongly deviate from the original.
It's still better to leverage diffusion models for their inpainting abilities rather than relying on the more modern do-it-all prompt-and-forget edit models IMO. And it's not like LLM's are capable of image editing either, as you can see on my local models, they want to invoke an external tool for that, and only write the recipe. It's safe to say that all the black box cloud models are much the same, hacks upon hacks upon hacks to automate things as smoothly as possible, where if you run things locally, you'll enjoy more flexibility in how you want your workflow to execute.
I don't have a comprehensive answer for you, my man. I just think that caring about user freedoms and talking about user freedoms is better for me now, and better for future geeks than rolling over and sucking Microslop's cock. Simple as.
You realize that you can care and talk about that without pandering to the GPL/FSF partisans, right? I mean, they're demonstrably incompetent, and there's lots of threats to user freedom happening right now that they refuse to have anything to do with because it doesn't fit their myopic, communist vision of "freedom". I suppose my biggest question for you is... I wonder if you realize that you have all the same freedoms with BSD/MIT/X licenses that you do with the GPL as soon as LLM-based coding agents are brought into the picture? When anything can be disassembled, its underlying ideas looted, all without breaking copyright law, the GPL becomes completely toothless... but so does every other license for that matter. What I'm trying to say here is that continuing to cling to the GPL makes you look absolutely retarded. It was retarded before coding agents were a thing, but it's California Democrat levels of retarded now.
wonder if you realize that you have all the same freedoms with BSD/MIT/X licenses that you do with the GPL as soon as LLM-based coding agents are brought into the picture? When anything can be disassembled, its underlying ideas looted, all without breaking copyright law, the GPL becomes completely toothless... but so does every other license for that matter. What I'm trying to say here is that continuing to cling to the GPL makes you look absolutely retarded. It was retarded before coding agents were a thing, but it's California Democrat levels of retarded now.
People keep making this argument, but in reality nobody's going to want to maintain a vibe-coded clone of any non-trivial project that they need as a dependency. An approach like that would truly be a last resort.
People keep making this argument, but in reality nobody's going to want to maintain a vibe-coded clone of any non-trivial project that they need as a dependency. An approach like that would truly be a last resort.
I wonder, considering the nature of Rust users, how they're handling the new found attention from the AI circle. I haven't had the time to take a look but maybe it'll be funny.
Having been around the hellish experience that is an Adobe license audit, they’re going to racially violate the creator of this project with lawyers long before it can go anywhere.
People keep making this argument, but in reality nobody's going to want to maintain a vibe-coded clone of any non-trivial project that they need as a dependency. An approach like that would truly be a last resort.
I just did this at work the other day to liberate something we wanted to use from GPL. Vibe-coding is when you use code from a single naked prompt. our harness has like 30 subagents with a bunch of different skill files that you train recursively with an update skill-skill mid session. A code monkey did it in a weekend when it would have taken a month or more in beforetimes.
You do it in a clean room by having one LLM scan the project to come up with a requirements / features document, then you feed the requirements doc into a different model and session so it creates a project with the same functionality but it doesn't infringe any of the code. Then you manually review and clean up the code and it's as easy as maintaining any other piece of code. People have been shitting themselves about this all year.
The extra stupid thing is this whole kabuki dance is only needed if you're a law-abiding western company. Chinese and Indian devs just steal the GPL code and nobody ever finds out, we are following the rules out of principle. That's another way the GPL is communist, it transfers wealth and IP from the first world to the third world.
