Hi Greg,
Please read my earlier reply in this thread[1].
HuggingFace is demonstrably violating the licenses of the Free
Software used to train its StarCoder2 LLM.
Software Heritage is continuing to partner with HuggingFace in
spite of these violations.
Guix is continuing to partner with SWH in spite of their continued
support of these violations.
Guix is indirectly enabling the violation of the license for the
Free Software it packages. Guix has the power to stop doing that.
What is your specific rationale for continuing to enable these
clear license violations?
Thanks,
— Ian
[1]:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2024-06/msg00195.html
Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> writes:
On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 12:33 PM MSavoritias
<em...@msavoritias.me> wrote:
Ah it seems I wasn't clear enough.
I meant write something like:
By packaging a software project for Guix you are exposing said
software
to a code harvesting project (also known as LLMs or "AI") run
by
Software Heritage and/or their partners. Make sure you have
gotten
fully informed consent and that the author of this package
fully
understands what the implications are.
Something like that. To make it clear that the package that is
about to
be added to Guix is going to be harvested for the LLM models
Software
Heritage decided to share the code with.
Hope this is more clear.
Free software licenses do not require bespoke consent to "to run
the
program, to study and change the program in source code form, to
redistribute exact copies, and to distribute modified versions"
(and
"Being free to do these things means (among other things) that
you do
not have to ask or pay for permission to do so.").
Your fear mongering against free software runs afoul of Guix
project
guidelines ("In addition, the GNU distribution follow [sic] the
free
software distribution guidelines. Among other things, these
guidelines
reject non-free firmware, recommendations of non-free software,
and
discuss ways to deal with trademarks and patents.").
If you feel that LLMs/AI are violating the terms of a license,
then
feel free to pursue that through the legal system (potentially
very
profitable given the monetary penalties for violations of
copyright).
Otherwise, we should be celebrating the users and use of free
software. I'm old enough to remember "Only wimps use tape
backup:
_real_ men just upload their important stuff on ftp, and let the
rest
of the world mirror it ;)"
[https://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/9607.2/0292.html].
