The only thing Microsoft is investing in is marketing to fool people into thinking they’re your friend. Remember that Copilot is automated open source license violation at scale. They’re building a tool to take your work, without crediting you, so others can use it without compensating you.
This is “love” in the same way an abusive relationship is “love”.
Do you think it’s a good idea to adapt licenses to be able to disallow training models on the source code? Do you think this could be enforced? If so, how?
The only thing Microsoft is investing in is marketing to fool people into thinking they’re your friend. Remember that Copilot is automated open source license violation at scale. They’re building a tool to take your work, without crediting you, so others can use it without compensating you.
This is “love” in the same way an abusive relationship is “love”.
Well, capitalism is an abusive relationship so we shouldn’t expect more.
Do you think it’s a good idea to adapt licenses to be able to disallow training models on the source code? Do you think this could be enforced? If so, how?
Yes. I’m strongly in favor of noncommercial clauses in licenses. Because fuck capitalism.
This was meant to be detached from commercial use, just on “training models”.
deleted by creator