From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jean Louis Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.tangents Subject: Re: Help building Pen.el (GPT for emacs) Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2021 15:47:21 +0300 Message-ID: References: <83lf642jeh.fsf@gnu.org> <83r1fp1es9.fsf@gnu.org> <83o8at1c63.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="11552"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mutt/2.0.7+183 (3d24855) (2021-05-28) Cc: stefan@marxist.se, emacs-tangents@gnu.org, mullikine@gmail.com, rms@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-tangents-bounces+get-emacs-tangents=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 23 14:51:21 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: get-emacs-tangents@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1m6ue9-0002t0-La for get-emacs-tangents@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 14:51:21 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54224 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m6ue8-0002nJ-Nb for get-emacs-tangents@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 08:51:20 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:57076) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m6udm-0002mj-N6 for emacs-tangents@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 08:50:58 -0400 Original-Received: from stw1.rcdrun.com ([217.170.207.13]:44145) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m6udk-0007xc-Qq; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 08:50:58 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([::ffff:197.157.0.30]) (AUTH: PLAIN admin, TLS: TLS1.3,256bits,ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by stw1.rcdrun.com with ESMTPSA id 0000000000057F2B.0000000060FABB29.000023B2; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 05:50:46 -0700 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83o8at1c63.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.170.207.13; envelope-from=bugs@gnu.support; helo=stw1.rcdrun.com X-Spam_score_int: -3 X-Spam_score: -0.4 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: (-0.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=1.5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-tangents@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs news and miscellaneous discussions outside the scope of other Emacs mailing lists List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-tangents-bounces+get-emacs-tangents=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-tangents" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.tangents:666 Archived-At: * Eli Zaretskii [2021-07-23 14:51]: > > According to online reviews chunks of code is copied even verbatim and > > people find from where. > > That cannot be true. It is nonsense to copy unrelated code into a > program and tell people this is what they should use. I wonder how sure you are in that, did you do the online research? It is not about related or unrelated, I do believe that AI finds and generates related code. But Here are references disputing how "it cannot be true": https://hacker-news.news/post/27710287 https://mmacvicar.medium.com/it-is-best-if-copilot-copies-everything-d84506128e5a https://loudlabs.nl/news/githubs-commercial-ai-tool-was-built-from-open-source-code/ > > If code compiles or not is irrelevant. If one runs it or not is also > > irrelevant, code need not even run. > > A feature or service that is based on this idea will never fly, > believe me. Which program would want to have code pasted into his/her > program that would cause compilation errors or, worse, break it at run > time? Of course people want code to fun. Just that copyright laws don't handle technical functionality. It is irrelevant if program works or does not work. There are thousands of copyrighted programs that cannot work any more as devices are not on the market, they are still under copyright. > > I do not believe that any of the AI-s so far "extract ideas". I never > > heard of it. Which algorithms is there on this planet that may extract > > idea? > > That's a very general question, it is impossible to answer it in a > post to a mailing list. If you are really interested, you will have > to read up on that. But you are wrong in your beliefs. > > > If newly generated code is modification from other code, what we know > > now that it is, and is based on, that requires licensing > > attributions. > > Once again, your assumptions are all wrong, so your conclusions are > also wrong. Why not try one of these services and see what they > actually do, before you pass your (quite harsh) judgment on them, and > on the modern state of AI in general? I can hear you how I am wrong, conclusions are wrong, though I gave you references enough to research it on Internet that will tell that there are possible serious licensing problems with such generated code. > > That licenses are relevant one can see from online discussions related > > to Github Copilot: > > That people ask these questions and discuss this doesn't mean the > problem is real. many people don't really understand what copyright > means and how to apply it to program code. Well said! Though that is not relevant. Question is very particular, specific and concrete: ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ How does Pen.el and background AI services ensure of licensing compliance? I would appreciate if you find solution to that or stay on that subject, as if I am wrong or right is not relevant, what I wish is to have assurance that it is free software. Prove me wrong by providing exact references in not only on country's law but also other countries' laws, the lows that make it legal, or how otherwise the legality of such code is justified and how users may get free software. For example you may wish to mention "fair use" and on the other hand similar laws must be found in other countries that would justify it to be free software. As long as you don't tackle those subjects there is no legal solution for Pen.el and background AI to be used with assurance that software is truly free software. Jean Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns In support of Richard M. Stallman https://stallmansupport.org/