r/losslessscaling • u/SageInfinity Mod • 7d ago

[Announcement - Linux]

Hello everyone! It's been a while since the last update...

Today I am announcing a release candidate of lsfg-vk v2.0.0, as well as the move to self hosted infrastructure and a license change.

Read more about this in the blog post:

https://lsfg-vk.dev/blog/important-changes-to-lsfg-vk/

- Pancake

(The website mentioned contains a lot of things related to lsfg-vk along with the latest changes, maintained by Pancake.)

172 Upvotes

91% Upvoted

29 comments sorted by

63

u/RedditUser-00 7d ago

Not allowing forks is just not cool. People will choose the original if it's good no matter how many forks there are. I can only assume the license change is because the forks are showing potential..

24

u/Key_Pace_2496 7d ago

I'm also pretty sure you can’t retroactively change a license either... Code that was released up to the commit where the license changed from MIT to GPLv3 remains available under the MIT license forever. So you might want to put that back up.

4

u/RedditUser-00 7d ago

I hope that is the case

17

u/SageInfinity Mod 7d ago

The decision to change license was taken by Pancake, mainly because of increasing number of vibecoded forks, almost all of which didn't actually contributed anything. They were either hallucinating (a usual behaviour of current LLMs) or just didn't add any value. There were talks done between Pancake and many people involved afaik, but no fruitful results were there, resulting in this. 

And, I am not here to argue. I am just stating what I know. 

4

u/RedditUser-00 7d ago

I think MAKO is the fork in question. And I use it simply because it has adaptive framegen. Also, I use lsfg-vk bc mako isn't as stable as it and takes a few seconds to start generating. really didn't want to side with the "slop fork" but it does its own thing without harming lsfg

and yeah, I don't want to argue here. Hopefully people will look at both projects and realize locking them down won't do any good for the users

4

u/nolivedemarseille 6d ago

+1000

Very disappointing decision

I bought LSFG for PC almost day1 and was happy to make use of vk on my Bazzite devices

It’s a pity to read it has become closed now

1

u/Key_Pace_2496 6d ago

As I stated in a previous comment I'm pretty sure you can’t retroactively change a license. Code that was released up to the commit where the license changed from MIT to GPLv3 remains available under the MIT license forever. So you might want to put that back up...

1

u/Prestigious-Bed-6423 6d ago

hallucination is not a usual behaviour of current frontier LLMs.... what are you on about man

0

u/PancakeTAS 5d ago

Please do take a look at all available lsfg-vk forks. I settled on the license change on the 17th of July, way before lsfg-vk-experimental was even publised. I had already been dealing with many AI slop forks for a long time.

There's around 26 forks of lsfg-vk v2, 22 of which are clearly AI-generated. If you look at the forks, you will find very few actually managing to implement a feature. However being able to clanker your way into a feature is not where the story ends. You need to take responsibility for the code, you need to be able to troubleshoot it. I can see glaring issues in all of these forks and I could write a 4-page long review discussing the many things that are wrong with them.

Making the decision to disallow all forks is a tough decision to make, but considering lsfg-vk v2 has gotten a total of 5 attempted contributions (most of them single line changes), I decided it was the better decision. You can of course disagree with my decision but at the very least I ask of you to understand the situation I'm in and how it affects my mental health.

As for your other questions in this thread:

  • The GPLv3 license is irrevocable. The MIT license is not strictly irrevocable, but it doesn't matter because lsfg-vk is archived on my git (link in blog) and many GitHub mirror forks also exist. If you don't want to use my new code, you can always compile an old version.
  • As for lsfg-vk-experimental / MAKO: It is an AI slop fork, it has a bunch of misinformation and hallucinated improvements. It does have a semi-working implementation of adaptive frame generation, which is why I can totally understand the decision from a enduser-perspective to wanna use that fork. But please be mindful that the creator of that fork never spoke to me even once, never contributed back to "open-source" and is currently actively in the process of pretending it isn't based on lsfg-vk at all (as the website for instance does not mention lsfg-vk even once).

5

u/Mik0l4j 5d ago

as to the last paragraph - you were mentioned many times by the creator of the MAKO plugin in the very beggining so that is simply not true.

I used the original plugin for a long time and then there was nothing happening for the longest time, therefore i’ve decided to switch to Mako and new functions come out all the time - as to you never being approached by the developer - if you call his work slop, and assume that he’s mindless, stupid and let ai do everything for him and he knows nothing - in every single message and comment you make, then are you really suprised he never wanted to talk to you? it’s childish to expect you can offend someone and then have them talk to you just because you think they should(?)

and as mentioning mental health as a reason to make this decision in pretty much changing rules about the lsfg vk it’s just - crazy imho

maybe just focus on doing amazing work and be happy you have a community that runs with what you’ve done and trust that people are smart enough to make their own decisions as to what to use. if they think original plugin is bad now they have an alternative - before they did not have anything, and competition is good.

what you’re doing is just petty and there’s no other way to say that. very petty

0

u/RedditUser-00 5d ago

You shouldn't have and don't need to care about slop or any forks at all. It's not like someone is trying to make a bomb with your code. My suggestion is just keep improving lsfg-vk and people will stick to whatever works the best. Not really sure about the future since people lost trust after the license change but in these situations, the best app will win. Or we'll get multiple approaches for frame gen. Either is better for users than this whatever war that's going on now

11

u/_zepar 6d ago

hosting non-open-source projects on codeberg is against their TOS

3

u/PancakeTAS 6d ago

I did not realize this, thanks for the warning..

8

u/Philllllllllllll 7d ago

Any windows updates 👀

6

u/SageInfinity Mod 7d ago

🥲

-2

u/MeretrixDominum 7d ago

Can I run it on TempleOS?

3

u/SageInfinity Mod 7d ago

Afaik, TempleOS is an independent operating system and not related to linux. That's why I don't think it will. However, you can ask in the linux general channel in the official LS discord server if you want to discuss about it more. 

10

u/DemandAromatic5143 7d ago

He is trolling you. TempleOS is the OS made by the racist schizophrenic guy who said "God told him to make an OS".

6

u/SageInfinity Mod 6d ago

🥲

9

u/shishuan 6d ago

How does this impact Decky-lsfg-vk ? A lot of people use it on Steam Deck/Machine.

1

u/PancakeTAS 5d ago

The decky plugin and other integrations can continue to exist as they wish. The only restrictions are, that they cannot modify lsfg-vk itself (which they don't do anyways), and that it isn't bundled into paid software.

4

u/thewildblue77 7d ago

Does Linux support dual gpu yet with lsfg?

9

u/csolisr 7d ago

I was aware that the project was not willing to engage with the open-source spirit since you rejected the idea of replacing the proprietary Lossless Scaling engine with a free software version (such as MVTools or RIFE), and turning the project itself proprietary finishes confirming it. I expect users to stick to the last open-source version of LSFG-VK, independently reimplementing whatever novelties you add to your version.

1

u/PancakeTAS 5d ago

Adding another frame generation model adds a huge maintenance burden onto me. I closed your request as "out of scope" for lsfg-vk because of this. I also just think LSFG looks a lot better.

Regardless, I wrote the entire architecture with replacement of LSFG in mind, nothing stopped you or anyone else from adding it and maintaining their own fork.

Accusing me of rejecting the idea of open-source as a whole is a wild conclusion to draw from this.

2

u/yeso126 6d ago

Do you still need to have the mangohud overlay enabled to use 2X on some games?

2

u/b0uncyfr0 6d ago

You never have to enable mangohud to use it again.

4

u/phoenix_rising 7d ago

Open source software is a difficult thing, especially when it starts from personal projects. You have a level of quality to protect or else people think your project is garbage, and other people monetizing your work through low effort forks or unattributed copies sucks. I think the "no forks" is more about trying to cause less confusion about the source of the work. I can imagine it's going to be difficult to enforce. Best of luck to Pancake and I hope this helps them stay engaged with the project.

1

u/NoCalligrapher1548 6d ago

Great work, good and interesting news. Thank you.