With all the discussion around detecting when a code repo contains commits authored by an LLM, I think it is important to note commits like the following in Mozilla Firefox from 2 weeks ago:
-
@mirabilos@toot.mirbsd.org
my understanding is that what you said is the case if it is disclosed, or failing that as in this case, can be determined after the fact:
"Zarya of the Dawn: A February 2023 decision that AI-generated illustrations for a graphic novel were not copyrightable, although the human-authored text of the novel and overall selection and arrangement of the images and text in the novel could be copyrighted."
but that if it is not disclosed, and the AI-generated output cannot be separated upon request from that made by humans, then the entire work is at risk:
"Théâtre D’opéra Spatial: A September 2023 decision that an artwork generated by AI and then modified by the applicant could not be copyrighted, since the applicant failed to identify and disclaim the AI-generated portions of the work as required by the AI
Guidance."@linear right. One could argue that the codebase ca. 2019 is likely untainted, and use that as measuring stick for what changed.
The other thing is that you can of course mix uncopyrightable PD stuff into a larger work, if your own stuff is copyrightable. That ofc only works if the former is indeed PD and not encumbered with the rights of the stolen works’ creatives.
-
@linear right. One could argue that the codebase ca. 2019 is likely untainted, and use that as measuring stick for what changed.
The other thing is that you can of course mix uncopyrightable PD stuff into a larger work, if your own stuff is copyrightable. That ofc only works if the former is indeed PD and not encumbered with the rights of the stolen works’ creatives.
@mirabilos@toot.mirbsd.org yeah. in this case i think it primarily raises concerns for future contributions. one wonders if a judge might, if reviewing this, rule that all contributions after this commit are public domain, unless the provenance of the code is very clear, e.g. patchsets taken from other projects which do practice due diligence -
With all the discussion around detecting when a code repo contains commits authored by an LLM, I think it is important to note commits like the following in Mozilla Firefox from 2 weeks ago:
"Bug 2011195 - When an agent commits, don't add itself as author"
https://github.com/mozilla-firefox/firefox/commit/71cc24b6a400dbd434e4df37087960d94b764791
I don't think it's a good thing that Mozilla seem to be explicitly encouraging unattributed LLM code in Firefox.
@sarahjamielewis If Firefox hadn't already driven me away for good I'd be very upset
-
With all the discussion around detecting when a code repo contains commits authored by an LLM, I think it is important to note commits like the following in Mozilla Firefox from 2 weeks ago:
"Bug 2011195 - When an agent commits, don't add itself as author"
https://github.com/mozilla-firefox/firefox/commit/71cc24b6a400dbd434e4df37087960d94b764791
I don't think it's a good thing that Mozilla seem to be explicitly encouraging unattributed LLM code in Firefox.
@sarahjamielewis There isn't much to think about this, this is objectively not good
-
With all the discussion around detecting when a code repo contains commits authored by an LLM, I think it is important to note commits like the following in Mozilla Firefox from 2 weeks ago:
"Bug 2011195 - When an agent commits, don't add itself as author"
https://github.com/mozilla-firefox/firefox/commit/71cc24b6a400dbd434e4df37087960d94b764791
I don't think it's a good thing that Mozilla seem to be explicitly encouraging unattributed LLM code in Firefox.
@sarahjamielewis the “ai agent” cannot own the copyright on the code it produces so that might be one reason not to add anything to the author list - that said any code produced needs to be identified as you might have to check if it was copied from any training code (and the license requirements of that code). pyOpenSci and rOpenSci just wrote up new policies on this.
-
@sarahjamielewis
Yet another reason to abandon Firefox and Mozilla in general.Edit: Use NetSurf or Lynx. Or just curl or wget.
@jbowen@mast.hpc.social @sarahjamielewis@mastodon.social we need a new browser, its kinda ovbious, both the major browsers are horrible companies now. We need a new browser, we need it to be big, and paid devs to work on it. Volenteer based projects are cool, but there needs to be money behind if
-
With all the discussion around detecting when a code repo contains commits authored by an LLM, I think it is important to note commits like the following in Mozilla Firefox from 2 weeks ago:
"Bug 2011195 - When an agent commits, don't add itself as author"
https://github.com/mozilla-firefox/firefox/commit/71cc24b6a400dbd434e4df37087960d94b764791
I don't think it's a good thing that Mozilla seem to be explicitly encouraging unattributed LLM code in Firefox.
@sarahjamielewis Closed source who cares. But with open source if there’s a massive successful lawsuit due to the endless stealing of training material every piece of code produced from that training set is tainted.
That’s something that should make open source reject all this, as a very big risk that’s not worth it.
Imho.
-
@jbowen@mast.hpc.social @sarahjamielewis@mastodon.social we need a new browser, its kinda ovbious, both the major browsers are horrible companies now. We need a new browser, we need it to be big, and paid devs to work on it. Volenteer based projects are cool, but there needs to be money behind if
@skymtf @sarahjamielewis @jbowen I'm personally hoping that Orion by the Kagi devs will be good. I've been pleased with their search so far.
-
@skymtf @sarahjamielewis @jbowen I'm personally hoping that Orion by the Kagi devs will be good. I've been pleased with their search so far.
@wombatpandaa @skymtf @sarahjamielewis @jbowen
Kagi is hot garbage, sorry to say.
They're also wasting tons of resources developing AI slop, and don't understand basic privacy concepts either:
-
With all the discussion around detecting when a code repo contains commits authored by an LLM, I think it is important to note commits like the following in Mozilla Firefox from 2 weeks ago:
"Bug 2011195 - When an agent commits, don't add itself as author"
https://github.com/mozilla-firefox/firefox/commit/71cc24b6a400dbd434e4df37087960d94b764791
I don't think it's a good thing that Mozilla seem to be explicitly encouraging unattributed LLM code in Firefox.
@sarahjamielewis@mastodon.social the fact that theyre actively trying to hide this shit genuinely just disappoints me
-
With all the discussion around detecting when a code repo contains commits authored by an LLM, I think it is important to note commits like the following in Mozilla Firefox from 2 weeks ago:
"Bug 2011195 - When an agent commits, don't add itself as author"
https://github.com/mozilla-firefox/firefox/commit/71cc24b6a400dbd434e4df37087960d94b764791
I don't think it's a good thing that Mozilla seem to be explicitly encouraging unattributed LLM code in Firefox.
@sarahjamielewis if nothing else this is legally dubious. AI authored content is uncopyrightable so all LLM written code is public domain.
-
@wombatpandaa @skymtf @sarahjamielewis @jbowen
Kagi is hot garbage, sorry to say.
They're also wasting tons of resources developing AI slop, and don't understand basic privacy concepts either:
@pip @skymtf @sarahjamielewis @jbowen I'll admit that I don't love how much resources they're putting towards AI. I'll check out your link when I have some time, thanks!
-
With all the discussion around detecting when a code repo contains commits authored by an LLM, I think it is important to note commits like the following in Mozilla Firefox from 2 weeks ago:
"Bug 2011195 - When an agent commits, don't add itself as author"
https://github.com/mozilla-firefox/firefox/commit/71cc24b6a400dbd434e4df37087960d94b764791
I don't think it's a good thing that Mozilla seem to be explicitly encouraging unattributed LLM code in Firefox.
@sarahjamielewis im not sure this would evade detection since theres a .claude/settings.json file now explicilty telling it to do this ..
-
@pip @skymtf @sarahjamielewis @jbowen I'll admit that I don't love how much resources they're putting towards AI. I'll check out your link when I have some time, thanks!
@wombatpandaa @pip @skymtf @sarahjamielewis
Yeah, I definitely think of Kagi as an AI slop shop first. -
@jbowen@mast.hpc.social @sarahjamielewis@mastodon.social we need a new browser, its kinda ovbious, both the major browsers are horrible companies now. We need a new browser, we need it to be big, and paid devs to work on it. Volenteer based projects are cool, but there needs to be money behind if
@skymtf @sarahjamielewis I'd like one, which is why I'd gotten excited about Ladybird, but they turned out to be anti-trans scum.
-
With all the discussion around detecting when a code repo contains commits authored by an LLM, I think it is important to note commits like the following in Mozilla Firefox from 2 weeks ago:
"Bug 2011195 - When an agent commits, don't add itself as author"
https://github.com/mozilla-firefox/firefox/commit/71cc24b6a400dbd434e4df37087960d94b764791
I don't think it's a good thing that Mozilla seem to be explicitly encouraging unattributed LLM code in Firefox.
Well it can be. Maybe (but probably not) people will start to think more about the quality of code they're trying to contribute when it is their credibility and not the "xyz bots" on the line...
-
@sarahjamielewis@mastodon.social according to my understanding of current copyright guidance in the United States, doing this means they forfeit their copyright to the entire Firefox codebase.
@linear @sarahjamielewis No, the issue sound like an agent writes the commit message and commits it. Not about it writing it the actual code. That shouldn’t have any impact on the actual code base.
-
@linear @sarahjamielewis No, the issue sound like an agent writes the commit message and commits it. Not about it writing it the actual code. That shouldn’t have any impact on the actual code base.
@basxto@chaos.social @sarahjamielewis@mastodon.social from the Claude documentation I have read about this feature, it is explicitly used for adding co-authorship to commits and pull requests that are written substantially by the LLM. -
@basxto@chaos.social @sarahjamielewis@mastodon.social from the Claude documentation I have read about this feature, it is explicitly used for adding co-authorship to commits and pull requests that are written substantially by the LLM.@basxto@chaos.social @sarahjamielewis@mastodon.social the "pr" one is for pull request descriptions, but the "commit" one is about the contents of the commit, not just the message, as far as i can tell.
-
@sarahjamielewis the “ai agent” cannot own the copyright on the code it produces so that might be one reason not to add anything to the author list - that said any code produced needs to be identified as you might have to check if it was copied from any training code (and the license requirements of that code). pyOpenSci and rOpenSci just wrote up new policies on this.
@brianrepko @sarahjamielewis The issue seems to be the opposite. They don’t want the AI to add itself to the author list when hey let an AI write the commit message and commit it. The wording isn’t 100% clear, but the made changes look like that.
