That’s the joke…

Really? What's the punchline? I like jokes.

There is no technical difference.

Mount the parent read-only.

Frustratingly, it isn’t an original idea either, and there were better implementations even at the time.

Is there a jj solution for git LFS?

There’s a PR open with basic support but hasn’t been merged yet.

Large files in general is something the project would like to solve but it’s gonna take time.

It usually doesn’t introduce grammatical mistakes at the same time though.

These aren’t companies doing the patient storage. It is non profits setup and run by people who are signed up themselves.

It's basically the same thing. What's stopping them from eventually losing interest or the non profit getting hijacked. I personally think the whole thing is a huge waste of money and i can imagine some guys in 50 years will think so too.

That they and the people they care about are stored there. This is a far stronger incentive than any profit motive.

The second part of that sentence was the important bit.

And since all things under that umbrella are exactly the same...

The timelines are increasing powers of 2. It’ll take much longer to colonize all asteroids than to settle Mars.

Yes, training is considered fair use, and output is non-copyrightable / public domain. With many asterix and footnotes, of course.

Don't see how output being public domain makes sense when they could be outputting copyrighted code.

Shouldn't the right's extend forward and simply require the LLM code to be deleted?

With many asterix and footnotes. One of which being that if it literally output the exact code, of course that would be copyright infringement. Something that greatly resembled but with minor changes would be a gray area.

Those kinds of cases, although they do happen, are exceptional. In a typical output that doesn't not line-for-line resemble a single training input, it is considered a new, but non-copyrightable work.

(I'm not a lawyer)

You should be careful about speaking in absolute terms when talking about copyright.

There is nothing that prevents multiple people from owning copyright to identical works. This is also why copyright infringement is such a mess to litigate.

I'd also be interested in knowing why you think code generated by LLMs can't be copyrighted. That's quite a statement.

There's also the problem with copyright law and different jurisdictions.

It is the official stance of the US copyright office.

It was upheld by Thaler v. Perlmutter.

Bartz v. Anthropic and Kadrey v. Meta confirmed with similar rulings.

First, you have to prove it that it produced the copyrighted code. The question is what copyrighted code is in the first place? Literal copy-paste from source is easy but I think 99% of the time this isn't the case.

This is a great article. Anyone know more content like this?