

Yep, this is why we use GPL! Using a permissive license is like lending money to a friend—you should never, ever expect to get your money back. “Good” companies aren’t altruistic, they’re ruthlessly self-interested. They’re not going to give back to your project unless there’s a damn good reason for them to do so. There are times when permissive licenses are totally fine (like when writing some kinds of libraries), but if you care about freedom of an application then you should stay the fuck away from MIT, Apache, BSD, or any other permissive license. Just use the GPL, folks.
edit: Using GPL from the getgo would have prevented this atrocity from occurring: https://github.com/coredevices/libpebble3/commit/35853d45cd0ec51cb732be866f6f72467653a613
They couldn’t have relicensed the project without community approval if it had been using a copyleft license in the first place.
Also, fuck off with your fucking AGPL license with a copyright transfer CLA bullshit. I’d love to see a new version of the AGPL that expressly prohibits copyright transfers. Never let a company take your rights away from you. A copyright license makes even the GPL effectively meaningless if the company wants to rug pull at a later date.




You mean code completion that just parses a file into an AST and does fuzzy string matching against tokens used to build that AST? I would not personally classify that as AI. It’s code that was written by humans and is perfectly understandable by humans. There is no probabilistic component present, there is no generated matrix, there’s no training process, it’s just simple parsing and string matching.
It’s early and I’m tired and probably in a poor mood and being needlessly fussy, so I apologize if this completely misses the point of your comment. I agree that there’s other stuff we’ve been using for ages which could be reasonably classified as “AI,” but I don’t feel like traditional code completion systems fit there.