Free software people: A major goal of free software is for individuals to be able to cause software to behave in the way they want it toLLMs: (enable that)Free software people: Oh no not like that
-
Look, coders, we are not writers. There's no way to turn "increment this variable" into life changing prose. The creativity exists outside the code. It always has done and it always will do. Let it go.
This post did not contain any content. -
This post did not contain any content.
(Yes ok there are cases where code is beauty and embodies an idea that could make a grown man cry and:
(1) your code is not that code
(2) you would think nothing of copying the creative aspect of that code if you needed to don't fucking lie to me) -
(Yes ok there are cases where code is beauty and embodies an idea that could make a grown man cry and:
(1) your code is not that code
(2) you would think nothing of copying the creative aspect of that code if you needed to don't fucking lie to me)Personally I'm not going to literally copy code from a codebase under an incompatible license because that is what the law says, but have I read proprietary code and learned the underlying creative aspect and then written new code that embodies it? Yes! Anyone claiming otherwise is lying!
-
Free software people: A major goal of free software is for individuals to be able to cause software to behave in the way they want it to
LLMs: (enable that)
Free software people: Oh no not like thatThe problems with LLMs aren't that people can ask them to write software.
It's that they write something that looks like software. They have no semantic model of it.
And it's that people think they can do away with expertise and experience (and salaries).
Then there's the massive environmental and social damage they are causing.
-
When I write code I am turning a creative idea into a mechanical embodiment of that idea. I am not creating beauty. Every line of code I write is a copy of another line of code I've read somewhere before, lightly modified to meet my needs. My code is not intended to evoke emotion. It does not change people think about the world. The idea→code pipeline in my head is not obviously distinguishable from the prompt->code process in an LLM
@mjg59 One difference I see is that when I implement (myself, with my own limited brain) my idea (or somebody else's idea for that matter), I actually learn something about the said idea, it becomes more precise in my head. Also, it makes me have other ideas.
-
Look, coders, we are not writers. There's no way to turn "increment this variable" into life changing prose. The creativity exists outside the code. It always has done and it always will do. Let it go.
@mjg59 it is not art, but at least it is craft and skill. And both should be honored. LLM Code is the assemble yourself cardboard filled furniture of codecraft. It is cheaper and faster available but what you safe in price you lack in quality.
-
Free software people: A major goal of free software is for individuals to be able to cause software to behave in the way they want it to
LLMs: (enable that)
Free software people: Oh no not like that@mjg59 This doesn't feel right to me. IMO few people actually object to use of LLMs by individuals for tinkering on personal stuff.
The criticism as I see it is primarily that:
1) there are huge societal/political impacts - uncompensated use of copyrighted material; benefits of it accruing primarily to a few big players; energy use; layoffs; perceived misallocation of massive amounts of capital
2) the output quality of LLMs is t r a s h, unsuitable for professional use -
Free software people: A major goal of free software is for individuals to be able to cause software to behave in the way they want it to
LLMs: (enable that)
Free software people: Oh no not like that@mjg59
there is a difference between writing code and software engineeringwriting code requires no understanding or decision making abilities, the attitude is "if it works it works" even if it doesn't work because you don't know enough to realize there is a problem
when an engineer makes something, they make decisions and evaluate those decisions based on their knowledge and experience
I value the engineering, I see no value in someone wrangling an LLM
-
Personally I'm not going to literally copy code from a codebase under an incompatible license because that is what the law says, but have I read proprietary code and learned the underlying creative aspect and then written new code that embodies it? Yes! Anyone claiming otherwise is lying!
@mjg59 Perhaps, but anyone claiming an LLM has "learned the underlying creative aspect" is also lying.
-
Personally I'm not going to literally copy code from a codebase under an incompatible license because that is what the law says, but have I read proprietary code and learned the underlying creative aspect and then written new code that embodies it? Yes! Anyone claiming otherwise is lying!
@mjg59 So the big thing is that all art belongs to society. To promote creation, society grants limited exclusivity, mostly to fund the work.
This means that, in a utopia, copyright wouldn't exist because everyone could stand on everyone else's shoulders.
The biggest problem is the tail wagging the dog. It's not about promoting creation. It's about giving power plays in the game of life to a selected few. That's literally oppression.
-
@mjg59
there is a difference between writing code and software engineeringwriting code requires no understanding or decision making abilities, the attitude is "if it works it works" even if it doesn't work because you don't know enough to realize there is a problem
when an engineer makes something, they make decisions and evaluate those decisions based on their knowledge and experience
I value the engineering, I see no value in someone wrangling an LLM
@tthbaltazar @mjg59 holy shit this
-
@mjg59 So the big thing is that all art belongs to society. To promote creation, society grants limited exclusivity, mostly to fund the work.
This means that, in a utopia, copyright wouldn't exist because everyone could stand on everyone else's shoulders.
The biggest problem is the tail wagging the dog. It's not about promoting creation. It's about giving power plays in the game of life to a selected few. That's literally oppression.
@mjg59 Of course somewhat ironic because you'll sometimes get oppressor on oppressor conflicts... but, like Alien vs Predator, whoever wins, humans lose.
-
Personally I'm not going to literally copy code from a codebase under an incompatible license because that is what the law says, but have I read proprietary code and learned the underlying creative aspect and then written new code that embodies it? Yes! Anyone claiming otherwise is lying!
@mjg59 thankfully there are plenty of other reasons to dispise LLMs, so we don’t really have to have this discussion
-
Personally I'm not going to literally copy code from a codebase under an incompatible license because that is what the law says, but have I read proprietary code and learned the underlying creative aspect and then written new code that embodies it? Yes! Anyone claiming otherwise is lying!
@mjg59 Yeah, as soon as there‘s an ethically sourced and trained free LLM that‘s not controlled by very shitty companies I‘m totally on board with you.
Until then we shouldn’t let that shit near our projects.
-
Personally I'm not going to literally copy code from a codebase under an incompatible license because that is what the law says, but have I read proprietary code and learned the underlying creative aspect and then written new code that embodies it? Yes! Anyone claiming otherwise is lying!
@mjg59 that sounds illegal. i'm thinking of specific cases like re3. but that may be a language barrier problem. (re3 creators settled with taketwo in court eventually)
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/take-two-sues-creators-of-gta-reverse-engineering-project-re3/1100-6495920/ -
@mjg59 Yeah, as soon as there‘s an ethically sourced and trained free LLM that‘s not controlled by very shitty companies I‘m totally on board with you.
Until then we shouldn’t let that shit near our projects.
@chris_evelyn That is a coherent position that I have no fundamental disagreement with
-
Free software people: A major goal of free software is for individuals to be able to cause software to behave in the way they want it to
LLMs: (enable that)
Free software people: Oh no not like that@mjg59 Fuck off with that shit. This doesn't even smell like a good faith argument.
-
Look, coders, we are not writers. There's no way to turn "increment this variable" into life changing prose. The creativity exists outside the code. It always has done and it always will do. Let it go.
@mjg59 Weird view of writers as a group you are expressing here, in order to make this distinction.
Code isn't there to be art, sure. It is there to communicate, though. Making this some weird thing about art, as if that's the only reason software developers might not want LLM generated code in their code bases, is… disingenuous to say the least.
-
Personally I'm not going to literally copy code from a codebase under an incompatible license because that is what the law says, but have I read proprietary code and learned the underlying creative aspect and then written new code that embodies it? Yes! Anyone claiming otherwise is lying!
@mjg59 I agree with this last statement
-
@mjg59 Yeah, as soon as there‘s an ethically sourced and trained free LLM that‘s not controlled by very shitty companies I‘m totally on board with you.
Until then we shouldn’t let that shit near our projects.
@chris_evelyn @mjg59 Isn't https://ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/eth-news/news/2025/09/press-release-apertus-a-fully-open-transparent-multilingual-language-model.html supposed to be something like that?
