joarxpablo

6 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by joarxpablo 1mo ago

   I agree that this is a crisis for FLOSS, and for the copyleft technique in particular. But in my mind projects always have some level of human contribution, and those contributions will still be copyrightable. A company copying a FLOSS proj
2. 2.▲
   by joarxpablo 1mo ago

   It is a bit hard to quantify the FLOSS-nature of open-weight models, but technically Deepseek publishes all of their models under the MIT license ( https://huggingface.co/models?license=license:mit ), an FSF-approved FLOSS li
3. 3.▲
   by joarxpablo 1mo ago

   As for case #1 I personally believe this to be the same as learning from preexisting code as individuals do. But it is of course still an open questions and as I said I accept the FSF's arguments on not accepting LLM contributions to G
4. 4.▲
   Being Against LLMs Is Against the Spirit of Floss(joarvarndt.se)

   19 points by joarxpablo 1mo ago|14 comments
5. 5.▲
   The Trouble with Fusion(joarvarndt.se)

   1 points by joarxpablo 6mo ago|0 comments
6. 6.▲
   by joarxpablo 11mo ago

   I also don't think that autocracy is more productive than democracy, but the industrial revolution is absolutely not dependent on democracy. Imperial Germany was a practically feudal political system and yet it still managed to drive s
7. 7.▲
   by joarxpablo 11mo ago

   I think that's the wrong lesson to take. The realist approach to international relations where states are controlled from the top as you describe is more legible. Instead I agree that it's really based on interpersonal relationshi