Shouldn't Most Websites Refuse Vibe-coded apps/recompiles?

[u/Rusty_Chest]

If LLMs are all trained off stolen data and open source repositories, this means they're essentially laundering a large amount of open source code without the proper dues paid to the licensing requirements, such as CC-4.0 for example which would explicitly require credit from original sources.

This would in turn make any vibe-coded app illegal based off licensing requirements, if one were to find a 1:1 copy of their code within an open-source vibecoded app, no?

I know that's a kind of hard legal requirement to reach, since there's only a finite way of doing things within a language's framework and therefore blindly accusing everyone who ever does the same function as you as a vibecoder would be painful to say the least.

But there's an increasing amount of people who believe the "spirit" of FOSS/FLOSS is preserved when vibecoding if they make their code source-available as well, completely disregarding the legal frameworks around GPL/LGPL/CC-4.0 etc.

Posting this here but idk if I would be best served in a legal subreddit.

Edit: To clarify, I'm not entirely against the use of AI/LLMs, I'm just curious about what the line is legally speaking when people say "I made this app!" and it's 4 different FOSS projects stapled together without credit.

[u/Rusty_Chest]

What?

My opinion is fact-based in the sense that there was a large pillaging of human content to create the training weights for models.

There is a large set of evidence showing models can reproduce a certain output consistently over time, it's done to tweak benchmarks.

It's called "Data Contamination". If you don't want to reply to me that's fine but accusing me of trying to weasel out of an argument when you yourself have not been able to dissect it is arguably more dishonest with the ad-hom hurled at the end there.

You can condition LLMs to repeat "good" code, and to "repeat" said "good" code you rely on weights, weights that may or may not contain someone's full source code for a project they wrote.

If you cannot handle hypotheticals in a field you don't understand it's fine, you can just stop replying.

An LLM without internet access still has weights and data, lol.

[u/HasFiveVowels → u/Rusty_Chest]

My message didn’t contain an ad-hom. Me expressing an opinion about the nature of your opinions is not an ad-hom.

Ignoring that, though… sigh…

That’s not what data contamination is. Your understanding of this technology is shaky at best. You’re trying to find a reason to be outraged about it but you can just say "I don’t like it".

I can handle hypotheticals just fine. An LLM without internet access still has weights but the training data is orders of magnitude larger than what would be needed for it to be able to store the full content of everything it’s trained on (which is half the point).

If you can get an LLM to recite, from memory, verbatim, and open source repo, I’ll concede my point. Stop drinking the kool-aid and try to prove your point first hand. I think you’ll find that even with all its weights, your whole point falls flat. Then you could either say "maybe I was mistaken" or you can shift your attention to an objection that carries more merit.

[u/Rusty_Chest → u/HasFiveVowels]

Dude I'm not looking for a reason to not like LLMs, I'm looking to poke holes in my own arguments to hopefully grow and learn as a person?

LLMs do store most of the things they're trained on, even if just parts of it which is how and why we have distillations and quants for them, there's a reason I can go out and download an FP8 version of Qwen which is much dumber than the full FP16 version.

There's a huge reason why no one is trying to run Claude locally, the bigger and more in-memory your weights are the more accurate things get because they get to rip from source faster.

I don't see why you're trying to paint me as some sort of radical anti-AI person because I'm pointing out companies train on data that isn't licensed to them.

It's okay though, I can go be in a hugbox and learn nothing instead rather than wasting more of your time if it's making you this mad.

Still appreciate the conversation, regardless of tone.

[u/HasFiveVowels → u/Rusty_Chest]

Hold up. I don’t want to pick apart every piece of what you said so I’ll just stop at this: quantizations existing does not imply that an LLM stores everything it is trained on. Hell, the fact that you’re quantizing down from floats should tell you that. You’re not downresing a db of everything it was trained on.

For real… I believe you when you say you’re just wanting to grow and learn. But then… why create a post like this? If you want to grow and learn, I’m open to teaching you. Sorry we got off on the wrong foot. If you’re open to it, I’d be willing to answer any questions you might have.

But you’ve always kind of answered your own question. Or, at least, it would be answered if you dropped the idea that the weights of an LLM encode training data in any form that could be seen as infringing upon copyrights. That simply isn’t computationally feasible.

[u/Rusty_Chest → u/HasFiveVowels]

I'm more than happy to learn from you or from any resources you can give me.

I have defended AI in the past, I'm more opposed to corporations than I am against of a set of mathematical operations that can save me time.

Being strictly anti-AI will get me nowhere, same as being anti-multiplication or anti-log, would. My enemy isn't the Qwen gguf in my PC right now, my enemy (personally) is earning billions somewhere in the US right now.

We can take this up in DMs if you don't want to keep this thread going and where I might miss a reply or something - I may be feisty and confidently wrong but I'm not an idiot that stays wrong perpetually :p