| 10 Mar 2026 |
|  amaan joined the room. | 06:53:26 |
 magic_rb | And youre all still successfully ignoring all the moral issues of using these LLMs:
- Burning the planet even more than were already were: check
- Preventing people from buying new computers or upgrading old ones: check
- Stealing everyones copyrighted works and profiting off of them: check
| 09:21:48 |
| magic_rb | Using the things at all and in any capacity is in my immoral | 09:23:01 |
|  etwas joined the room. | 15:52:13 |
 Jonathan Fishbein | Yea theres no pr just my personal repo. More of a poc than anything | 16:09:50 |
| Jonathan Fishbein | It would have been disingenuous to have removed claude as a contributor | 16:19:48 |
 jaen | If you would have done enough work on it yourself for it to qualify as your IP it wouldn't have been disingenuous. As it is now, this code is nobody's (or everybody's I guess, belongin in public domain) in some jurisdictions (e.g. EU), so in a way it's actually disingenuous to put anybody as the author P: | 16:39:25 |
| magic_rb | i would say that the code should be illegal, since its derived from everyones code without anyones permission | 16:41:03 |
| magic_rb | or assuming it was only derived from GPL code (unlikely) then it under the GPL and the copyright is held by everyone | 16:41:36 |
| jaen | YMMV, but in my view all of this is a capitalism problem, not a model problem. Eat the rich and suddenly models stop being immoral. And YMMV, but 3. is good actually. It's copyright that is immoral and EU having an internal legal report saying that LLM code without enough human input to qualify as transformative is in public domain. | 16:41:49 |
| magic_rb | no copyright is not immoral as long as copyright exists | 16:42:19 |
| magic_rb | i would prefer if there was no copyright, or rather everything was required to be under the AGPLv3 | 16:42:39 |
| magic_rb | but we dont live in that world, as such it is morally acceptable for me to enforce AGPLv3 for my projects so that they can't be profited of. Either everyone plays by the rules of no copyright or im not playing either | 16:43:22 |
| jaen | Fair I suppose? Before it gets further off the rails, just one remark that my understanding is according to this interpretation they can't really profit off such code, because it's not theirs to begin with, because without the transformative element it defaults to public domain. Of course another question is enforcing that by suing and winning, but it's the same problem with GPL in principle? | 16:46:04 |
| magic_rb | yeah i guess we agree mostly, and yes, not the right room for this at all, i just cant help myself. I have a very strong opinion on this issue | 16:47:38 |
| jaen | Yeah. We probably don't agree at the core (I don't really hate models), but we probably agree on hating people using them to the detriment of society at large. And it's understandable how a person with human feelings and empathy can get angry at that. Anyway, peace & out on this end | 16:51:54 |
| magic_rb | last remark:
(I don't really hate models)
if someone presents me a model which was trained only on code which is either all permissive or if GPL then produces GPL code, id consider it. ofc then the question of elecricity cost and training cost comes along and the fact that such a model would be incredibly useless. currently the tech fundamentally relies on theft to function
| 16:54:28 |
| magic_rb | * last remark:
(I don't really hate models)
if someone presents me a model which was trained only on code which is either all permissive or if GPL then produces GPL code, id consider it. ofc then the question of elecricity cost and training cost comes along and the fact that such a model would be incredibly useless. currently the tech fundamentally relies on theft to function | 16:54:33 |
| 12 Mar 2026 |
|  crstl changed their profile picture. | 18:02:38 |
| 13 Mar 2026 |
 waltmck | People keep saying this, but individual use of LLMs is really not a significant contributor to climate change---see here for a more detailed breakdown. In particular, if you are only concerned about energy usage, probably compiling Android from source is a lot more unethical than the LLM use in the course of development. | 23:16:35 |
| magic_rb | individual use maybe, but thats the same argument as with vegan stuff | 23:17:10 |
| waltmck | The biggest problem is that they just don't produce a great quality of code yet, so the reviewing burden becomes greater than the burden of having an LLM write you a PR | 23:17:16 |
| magic_rb | individual it doesnt matter, but if everyone does it | 23:17:20 |
| waltmck | Right, but if you are concerned with power use why are you compiling Android? | 23:17:31 |
| magic_rb | again | 23:17:38 |
| magic_rb | there are 4 people compiling android | 23:17:47 |
| magic_rb | against thousands running llms and generating millions of lines of slop | 23:18:03 |
| magic_rb | one isnt quite the same than the other | 23:18:16 |
| magic_rb | if you cant see that we have nothing to discuss | 23:18:25 |
| waltmck | Huh? So going out and shooting an animal is more ethical than eating a steak because more people are eating steak than going out and shooting an animal? That is just a very strange argument | 23:18:57 |
