Well they didn’t pay me. But still used all my open source mit and agpl, gpl icensed code to train their model. And now I need to rent their compute back.
You chose to publish under that essentially says “do whatever, I dont care”. I can understand people who wrote GPL code being peeved, but writing stuff under MIT is pretty much designed to let companies take it and not give back.
Sorry also some projects are agpl or gpl indeed. I actually meant to say agpl. They most likely also stole that. Let’s be honest here.
For example my WineGUI project is agpl. Also I’m also fine if they trained on it. But then they should open source their models and data and their other projects.
Well they didn’t pay me. But still used all my open source mit and agpl, gpl icensed code to train their model. And now I need to rent their compute back.
You chose to publish under that essentially says “do whatever, I dont care”. I can understand people who wrote GPL code being peeved, but writing stuff under MIT is pretty much designed to let companies take it and not give back.
Sorry also some projects are agpl or gpl indeed. I actually meant to say agpl. They most likely also stole that. Let’s be honest here.
For example my WineGUI project is agpl. Also I’m also fine if they trained on it. But then they should open source their models and data and their other projects.
I mean sure, Anthropic are pricks, but “they did exactly what the license I put on my code said they could” is probably not the way to highlight that.
My bad. I actually meant agpl. And gpl. You’re right to point out the that mit is fine. Which is true. Mit can be used for whatever.
But my for example my WineGUI project is agpl. Pretty sure those Ai companies used all open source code regardless of the license.
I’m actually also fine if they trained on my agpl code. But then they should have open sourced their models and data. And their whole project.