Road to success (2024 AI Hype Edition):
- Clone VSCode.
- Rename it as LSCode, squash all history, and create some random commits with
--author="Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>". - Add a character AI that calls your code garbage.
- Profit.
So all it takes to get that sweet, sweet VC mula is a Vscode + extension fork with some hipster branding on top? Really???
Aren't these guys supposed to be tech geniuses or some shit?
Billions of dollars and they don't have a single actually knowledgeable intern who could glance at this project and say "yeah, no, I could do this too?"
Or are they're just ignoring them because AI is a glowing hot buzzword right now?This is baffling. The entire tech sector praises VCs like they're god's gift to earth, meanwhile they're out here backing stupid shit like this, how can anyone take these people seriously?
dawg i chatgpt'd the license [...] we busy building rn can't be bothered with legal
The absolute gall of these guys. Would be inspiring if it wasn't maddening!
Slight correction. AI is not a scam.
While AI is a powerful tool, it enables people to do scams very easily.
There are a lot of scams around AI and there's a lot of very serious science.
While generative AI gets all the attention there are many other fields of AI that you probably use on a regular basis.
The reason we don't see the rest of the AI iceberg is because it's mostly interesting when you have enormous amounts of data you want to analyze and that doesn't apply to regular people. Most of the valuable AIs (as in they've been proven to make or save a bunch of money) do stuff like inventory optimization, protein expression simulation, anomaly detection, or classification.
It's otherwise a fairly well written article but the title is a bit misleading.
In that context, scare quotes usually mean that generative AI was trained on someone's work and produced something strikingly similar. That's not what happened here.
This is just regular copyright violations and unethical behavior. The fact that it was an AI company is mostly unrelated to their breaches. The author covers 3 major complaints and only one of them even mentions AI and the complaint isn't about what the AI did it's about what was done with the result. As far as I know the APL2.0 itself isn't copyrighted and nobody cares if you copy or alter the license itself. The problem is that you can't just remove the APL2.0 from some work it's attached to.
This is great. So all their VC-funded work will get released publicly, and we all benefit.
I don't see why people are upset that FOSS projects are getting VC funding for development..
This is how open source is supposed to work. Everything they're doing is now going to improve the open source codebase. This is good.
How is it boot licking to get money from rich people to develop open source software?
Lemmy is FOSS that was funded by a grant from NLNet. Its the same outcome as this.
If anyone is licking boots, its the rich people licking the FOSS boots
It's not how open source works but how venture funding works which is boggling minds here
