Sure you can. TOS docs are full of non legally enforceable wishful thinking bullshit, especially when they're written by an American company providing services to me in Europe. Most of the time they just expect (correctly) that they'll never get challenged in court over it.
After investing a bunch in converting my projects to, and evangelizing uv, I feel betrayed. I smell stability troubles ahead. Should've stuck to Conda.
I've been hurting for something like this for a while now. Many tmux windows soon become unwieldy to switch among, same as having a bunch of terminal tabs, and I have an unhealthy mix of both. Hopefully this scratches the itch.
According to US courts, the output can't be copyrighted at all. It's automatically in public domain after the "whitewash", regardless of original copyright.
Thats not at all what this ruling said. What the courts found was that an AI cannot hold copyright as the author. That copyright requires a human creative element. Not that anything that was generated by an LLM can't be subject to copyright.
As an example, a photo taken from a digital camera can be subject to copyright because of the creative element involved in composing and taking the photo. Likewise, source code generated by an LLM under the guidance of a human author is likely to be subject to the human authors copyright.
> That copyright requires a human creative element.
Sure, but the aim of that creative element would also be a consideration I'd think (and lawyers will argue). If someone sets up a camera on a 360° rotating arm and leaves it to take pictures at random intervals, it's unlikely to be considered "creative" from a copyright perspective.
Same for source code generated by an LLM, with the primary guidance of the human author being to "create a copy of this existing thing that I got", vs "create a thing that solves this problem in a way that I came up with". The former is recreating something that already exists, using detailed knowledge of that thing to shape the output. The latter is creating something that may or may not exist, using desire/need and imagination to shape the output. And I can't see reason for the former to be copyrightable.
But also, in either case, an ultimate objective was achieved: liberating the thing from its "owners" and initial copyright.
> As described above, in many circumstances these outputs will be copyrightable in whole or in part—where AI is used as a tool, and where a human has been able to determine the expressive elements they contain. Prompts alone, however, at this stage are unlikely to satisfy those requirements. The Office continues to monitor technological and legal developments to evaluate any need for a different approach.
But let's assume that the viktor prompts themselves were subject to copyright. In this case those prompts were used to generate documentation which was then used to generate an implementation. It's certainly not a clean room by any stretch of the imagination but is it likely to be deemed sufficient separation? The entire situation seems like a quagmire.
Is this for real? There has been a blockade on Cuba for decades. Any country that wants to do business with them is threatened, implicitly or explicitly. Look at how Venezuela, their primary supplier of oil, was recently invaded and taken over, and the shipments stopped.
> Cuba could also, at any point, have given up on Communism
Why should they? If it wasn't for the decades of sabotage it would've been working for them reasonably. Should they succumb to the bullying from another country that hates their ideals?
unlikely given there are no real examples of actual real communist states.
To be clear, the classic example of Cold War Russia and the USSR - their founders were clear that it wasn't communism .. just an "interim socialist phase" on the path to communism.
Still just authoritarian rule with an excess of epaulettes, braid, and big hats.
I'm not pro communism (which ever book version), nor a fan of the USSR, North Korea, the Mao revolution, etc - but real communism appears to be as rare as real capitalism.
The big problem seems to be broligarchies - small elite groups bullshitting everybody else from their seats of power.
reply