Lutris maintainer use AI generated code for some time now. The maintainer also removed the co-authorship of Claude, so no one knows which code was generated by AI.

Anyway, I was suspecting that this “issue” might come up so I’ve removed the Claude co-authorship from the commits a few days ago. So good luck figuring out what’s generated and what is not.

sauce 1

sauce 2

  • piccolo@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    2 days ago

    You can run your own ai models locally. Even if they were trained by the evil corporations. Do you also feel the same way about artists who pirated photoshop? Does that devalue their work?

    • mrmaplebar@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      If this is the best argument the pro-AI crowd has left at this point then you’ve lost all ability to reason…

      Pirating Photoshop is, at worst, taking advantage of Adobe, a multi-billion dollar corporation. They are still very profitable and their employees still got paid to do the work. We can debate the ethics of software piracy all day, and I would argue you’re better off investing your mental energy in FOSS, but in the end I think the social impact of people pirating Photoshop is quite small.

      Compare this to generative AI which is built on the unprecedented exploitation of all human arts, culture and intellectual labor without any form of consent or compensation. All for the benefit of the richest tech oligarchs who are more than happy to sell you a subscription to a product that they stole from the creative class.

      Who is benefitting the most from the AI bubble, the starving artist or the wealthy investor? The thoughtful engineer or the slop slinger? The workers or the suits?

      No matter what way you slice it, you’re not “sticking it to the man”, you are the man. He shouldn’t embarrass himself by blaming “capitalism” when he has shown that he is just as willing to exploit other people’s labor as the next guy–hes just stupid enough to do it for pennies to the AI billionaires dollar.

      • piccolo@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        My point was it AI is a tool. You can either use it or you dont. You speak of it being ‘expliotive’ but the world would be much better if copyright didnt exist and intellectual material was simply made available to everyone.

        • mrmaplebar@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Do you create, or just consume?

          A world without copyright would be significantly worse for the people who makes things, like writers, artists, musicians, etc.

          In the real world, with the current laws, nobody should be entitled to exploit other people’s physical or intellectual labor. If profit is exploitation, then why wouldn’t AI be?

          • piccolo@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            So you support FOSS? So does that mean you believe source code should be GPL or some other similar license?

            • mrmaplebar@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              I do support FOSS, in fact I have written FOSS code as part of my job in the non-profit space for almost a decade. I’m thankful for all of the people who write code whether it’s copyleft GPL or permissive MIT. But I still recognize that it’s their code and that they are simply granting me a license to use it under certain conditions.

              Generative AI takes those conditions and wipe their ass with them. I have a problem with that.