• Solumbran@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 hours ago

              Ah yes, the reality that consists in giving up on all proper solutions out of being “down to earth”, effectively solving nothing.

              • dontbelievethis@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 hours ago

                The proper not possible solution… Sure…

                People like you are the reason I gave up on the things getting better. What you people propose has nothing to do with how the world works we live in. It’s all based on how the world should work.

                Good luck with banning llms, seems realistic.

          • thingsiplay@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            23 hours ago

            Irrelevant question. For licensing and copyright questions, quality of code is not important.

            • Senal@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              16 hours ago

              Why would we want to license vibecoded slop code built with a system that is (in most cases) probably and admittedly actively using data from sources with incompatible licences or no licences at all.

              • thingsiplay@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                15 hours ago

                probably and admittedly actively using data from sources with incompatible licences or no licences at all

                You answered your own question. I don’t know what you try to say, but the article and our discussion is explaining if and why licensing code that is vibe coded is possible or makes sense at all. And you point the problem out that this is problematic and probably not possible in good faith. So its not about what we want, but about if and what is possible.

                • Senal@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  10 hours ago

                  Indeed, though I was just rephrasing the question from the person you were replying to.

                  Responded to the wrong comment, apologies.

      • theherk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        21 hours ago

        I don’t think the existence of something bad and needing to deal with that are mutually exclusive. Of course one should tackle the root of a problem. But you still need to bail water while the boat has a hole in it.

        • Solumbran@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          12 hours ago

          But licensing is trying to remove the water without doing anything about the hole. Or, best case situation, saying “we will fix the hole when the water is unmanageable, but for now we’ll just try to empty it faster than it fills”.

          If you ban LLMs, the problem will disappear. It’s not like you can really hide a datacenter so easily, or the size of the data required. Anything less than that will do nothing