It's nice to see such a willpower to use fully free distro. I am often prevented from using a fully free distribution only by the non-free firmware for AMD GPU.
JustVik
joined 1 month ago
Yes, value can be expressed not only in monetary terms. If people find it very valuable, they should pay more attention to privacy. However, you can protect yourself from cryptolockers by remote backups as one of the ways.
Then all available and legitimate methods of ensuring confidentiality are adequate and justified. But sometimes at work you may need to use programs that you don't really like etc. And without work, you will have nothing to eat. Maybe a little exaggerated.
Speaking specifically about me, I try to use free and open source software to the maximum extent possible. I only run non-free games sometimes. And sometimes some propriatary software for/at work.
If you are going to protect something, then you should not spend more on protection than the protected property is worth... It's always about balance. :)
Maybe It is possible to simply add functions to files that are not used anywhere with very delusional content. If people read it, they will easily understand that some nonsense is written in the function. Perhaps even with a comment that this is to protect against "AI" training. But only so that they do not repeat themselves and it is difficult to remove them all by one pattern...
Then I have nothing to fear. My code is already ready for this. :D
Thank you very much for your reply. I support your opinion in a way that I am already inclined that a complete prohibition on the training of "AI" models on the source code of software is not a very good solution and is difficult to limit according to current laws. I hope somtimes someone smart will come up with some approaches to such problems.
Yes I understand It's complex question. In principle, I support the freedoms declared in the GPL. But the GPL license itself restricts the use of code in closed source proprietary programs for the sake of the freedom of all future users. And the question arises, isn't the whole point of this nullified if you can train an "AI" model on this code, and then use the output from the "AI" of the same code in closed sourced proprietary programs? I wouldn't mind if these "AI" were the same kind of free and open source software, but even then you can use their output to create your own closed source proprietary programs... Maybe you are right, it is not entirely clear what is better in this case.
That's a good idea. Now I have to think about how to formulate it better and what it will mean. :)
But what will stop them from train copilot on code from other publicly available hostings. Are there any restrictions why they won't be able to do it using something like the principles of fair use as an excuse in this case?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLfFWXUNJ_I It's more of one playlist than a channel about quantum mechanics on Russian, but as I see it has English subtitles. A fairly clear explanation with a small amount of simple mathematics, probably the minimum that is possible. It helps to understand at least a little such a complex and illogical science for the average layman.
Something like a joke about this:
If you're working on something genius great, no matter who's watching you, they won't understand anything, but if you're doing ordinary things, it's really not that important that someone is watching.
But of course, annoying comprehensive surveillance, especially from commercial companies, certainly should not be justified.