From: MSavoritias <email@msavoritias.me>
To: Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il>
Cc: MSavoritias <email@msavoritias.me>,
Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>,
Ian Eure <ian@retrospec.tv>,
guix-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Next Steps For the Software Heritage Problem
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2024 13:34:11 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240619133411.43114fb9@fannys.me> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZnKq1iauEbgwBIAr@3900XT>
On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 12:54:30 +0300
Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 12:13:38PM +0300, MSavoritias wrote:
> > On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 09:52:36 +0200
> > Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Ian, all,
> > >
> > > On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 at 10:57, Ian Eure <ian@retrospec.tv> wrote:
>
> > > I think that LLM asks ethical and legal question that even FSF or
> > > EFF or SFC does not provide clear answers. (And that probably
> > > the level where the discussion should happen.) That’s not a
> > > light topic and we should not rush in one definitive conclusion.
> > >
> > > Thank you for the rise of the concern some weeks ago. It appears
> > > to me good that people had expressed their concerns. And still
> > > does. Although I am reading there or overthere an aggressive
> > > tone; useless.
> > >
> > > Again, people behind SWH are long-term free software activists
> > > and be sure that they do not take this concern lightly. FYI,
> > > people of SWH are in touch with some people from Guix to speak
> > > about all that.
> >
> > That is a very good point actually and it is one I also raised in
> > the email I sent. That we have been told there are some discussions
> > but we haven't seen any results for over 6 months now. Hence me
> > asking for anybody that has approached SH in an official Guix
> > capacity to step forward. Otherwise as I said I can approach SH :)
>
> The relationship between SWH and Hugging Face is (IMO) off-topic for
> the Guix mailing lists. I'm not surprised that the discussions are
> happening elsewhere.
Given that any code and package that is contributed to Guix goes to SWH
and Hugging Face I would disagree.
> > > 2. Ethical.
> > >
> > > If we speak about ethical concerns, we need to be very cautious.
> > > We all share the same core of values about free software. Then
> > > we all do not bound these values to the same point. Some of us
> > > extend them to some topics, other restrict a bit.
> > >
> > > Here the issue is that other values than the ones about free
> > > software are dragged in the picture to emit a position. That’s
> > > where we need to be cautious because we need to embrace the
> > > diversity and do not morally judge what is outside our free
> > > software project.
> > >
> > > About SWH, FWIW, here is my moral reasoning; as you see, it is
> > > far to be definitive.
> >
> > I agree that we probably won't find any definitive answer if LLMs
> > are bad or not. But that is also not the question posed here tho.
> >
> > The question posed here was that *all* code that is sent from Guix
> > to SH is automatically transfered without consent to be used in an
> > LLM model. That is without said process being opt-in and without
> > said process being transparent.
>
> I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV.
>
> Transferring the code is (legally) fine, using the code is (legally)
> fine, distributing the result is (I think) legally questionable.
>
> If your concern is the code being transferred to the LLM owners, IMO
> that's already covered by the license of the code itself. As for what
> the LLM owners do with the code, (again I am not a lawyer) it should
> not make a difference if SWH gives them the code, they download it
> from Guix's infrastructure or get it straight from upstream.
> Redistributing the source code is allowed.
Idk if you read the email that was sent to Greg in the other thread.
Given that you replied there too I assume you did.
So given this context I am repeating again that is not about legal and
let me copy-past my reply to the legal argument:
Quote:
You seem to be arguing on a different thread or a point I never made. I
didn't talk about licenses or legal/state rules before you mentioned
them. What I have mentioned is that SH breaks our social rules and
expectations by feeding all code into an algorithm that will endlessly
output the same as original.
I am not interested what the states or licenses/copyrights allow or
don't allow in this case. What I care about is what we expect as a
community when we submit a package/code to guix and if that violates
our social rules and expectations. And from what I have seen and talked
with people it does indeed.
> > The second one could be solved by adding the disclaimer and making
> > the changes to commit packages as a i said. It can also be done I
> > was told by just stopping guix from uploading any new code to SH
> > from any package. which I would also be in favor.
> > The first one can be done with social pressure which is what the
> > blogpost and the talking and potentially the not including SH into
> > Guix go towards.
> >
> > Whether LLMs are ethical or not has nothing to do with the question
> > posted above. Although personally I would push for not including
> > LLMs unless under strict criteria of environmental and ethical
> > sourcing. but that can come at a later time.
> >
> > I would also like SH to see why opt-in should be the default at the
> > very least, and the process should be transparent to everybody
> > putting code into SH. Archiving source code is a good cause. This
> > is why I said to approach them in official Guix capacity :)
>
> One of our packages, dbxfs, left Github a while ago and continued
> development on a different forge. They adjusted their README to
> disallow hosting of their code on Github. Based on this restriction
> we have labeled later versions of the software as non-free and have
> not updated the package. IMO saying that source code cannot be
> uploaded to SWH would fall into the same category.
Good thing that is not what i suggested then. :)
Regards,
MSavoritias
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-19 10:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-19 7:52 Next Steps For the Software Heritage Problem Simon Tournier
2024-06-19 9:13 ` MSavoritias
2024-06-19 9:54 ` Efraim Flashner
2024-06-19 10:25 ` raingloom
2024-06-19 15:46 ` Ekaitz Zarraga
2024-06-20 6:36 ` MSavoritias
2024-06-20 14:35 ` Ekaitz Zarraga
2024-06-21 8:51 ` MSavoritias
2024-06-19 10:34 ` MSavoritias [this message]
2024-06-19 14:41 ` Simon Tournier
2024-06-20 6:51 ` MSavoritias
2024-06-20 14:40 ` Simon Tournier
2024-06-21 9:08 ` MSavoritias
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-06-28 18:01 Juliana Sims
2024-06-18 17:12 Andy Tai
2024-06-18 18:08 ` Ian Eure
2024-06-19 10:31 ` raingloom
2024-06-27 12:27 ` Ludovic Courtès
2024-06-27 15:30 ` Ian Eure
2024-06-27 16:48 ` Felix Lechner via Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
2024-06-27 16:58 ` Ludovic Courtès
2024-06-18 8:37 MSavoritias
2024-06-18 14:19 ` Ian Eure
2024-06-19 8:36 ` Dale Mellor
2024-06-20 17:00 ` Andreas Enge
2024-06-20 18:42 ` Dale Mellor
2024-06-20 20:54 ` Andreas Enge
2024-06-20 20:59 ` Ekaitz Zarraga
2024-06-20 21:12 ` Andreas Enge
2024-06-21 8:41 ` Dale Mellor
2024-06-21 9:19 ` MSavoritias
2024-06-21 13:33 ` Luis Felipe
2024-06-20 21:27 ` Simon Tournier
2024-06-18 16:21 ` Greg Hogan
2024-06-18 16:33 ` MSavoritias
2024-06-18 17:31 ` Greg Hogan
2024-06-18 17:57 ` Ian Eure
2024-06-19 7:01 ` MSavoritias
2024-06-19 9:57 ` Efraim Flashner
2024-06-20 2:56 ` Felix Lechner via Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
2024-06-20 5:18 ` MSavoritias
2024-06-19 10:10 ` Efraim Flashner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://guix.gnu.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240619133411.43114fb9@fannys.me \
--to=email@msavoritias.me \
--cc=efraim@flashner.co.il \
--cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=ian@retrospec.tv \
--cc=zimon.toutoune@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).