HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submit | gregoriol's commentslogin

Of all the ideas ever tried, this one seems to be the worst

Yeah, feels worse that solar roadways.

Why?

What could be simpler than "$ git stash" and "$ git stash pop" ?

Was going to post about this: the last image models with Apache 2.0 license seem to be from 2025, recent Qwen models are "non-commercial use".

Companies can use llm to license-wash open source code regardless of license.

How difficult would it be to use this model to create a second model without licensing issues?


Why would you even do that? Just... use it? There hasn't been any legal precedent on if models can even be copyright restricted. Labs just keep publishing license documents as if they matter.

Well, it is an indication that it matters to the lab, so if you don't want legal fees to be the first one to set precedent, then it does matter a great deal.

You could say the same thing about "license-washing" the model. It seems like you're just going through a guaranteed expensive process to have roughly the same risk as just using the model and potentially getting hit with legal fees.

No one really cares about licenses, especially now. Just use it, the odds of consequences are unfathomably low.

What.

I love the non-commercial clauses because of how many people are using these for deceptive ads and “virtual staging” and fake social media accounts. Anything that makes those guys lives harder while still letting me make silly pictures for my kids and tapestries for my D&D campaign feel fine by me.

This achieves absolutely nothing to that end.

People can continue to use closed SOTA models to generate outputs for commercial or malicious purposes.

What this research license achieves is that we cannot use this model in applications we publish.


You think they care about the probably unenforceable license terms?

> All that happens is the perp loses any audience

You haven't heard about rickrolling, have you?


Pro Max is still available


lmao


That's because you do have the most common stuff: that's a choice. You could have a less common smartphone (iPhone SE? Fairephone?), audiophile headphones (Denon? Kef?), ... that would be more personal and better choice.


Unique IPs is not something AI can generate easily, and blocking IPs in general is not efficient.

The big problem with AIs is that they can try new paths/payloads very easily, adapt quickly, I'd be more worried about that.


It would be nice if it was easy to "place the HTML where it belongs", but in a complex app it's never just-replace: you have to preserve a lot of state, wether it is filters, forms, user selection, scroll position, ... so updating live becomes quite a huge work.

I've seen good attempts with libraries like idiomorph, but still quite some plumbing to do depending on the app.


So basically Facebook ads won and we are doomed


>and we are doomed

Only if you're so hopelessly addicted to Facebook that you just have to roll over and take this. You always have the option to just not use Facebook.


Maybe you are doomed, but lots of others will simply walk away from it. FB may have won the battle, but that doesn't mean we have lost the war.


Nah. I never see Facebook ads. Easy peasy.


Apple has deprecated all of that now


You're right - I have to move them to Network Framework when I have time :)


When you get around to doing that, you might find the Github repo and its accompanying medium article useful.

https://github.com/0Itsuki0/SwiftUI_P2PWithNetwork


Nice! I was really missing working examples when I replaced an MPC by the lower-level Network, not an easy task, but it provides huge improvements


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: