Could you give some examples of problem domains that should be left as is? I don’t see the proposal as a problem at all.

About time. This will help to give some transparency about who operates the given domain.

Yes and no. As an author of open source projects, they were made available for people to fork, improve and conrribute under permissive licenses. Then come LLMs that uses code like mine to generate code or slop. My choice about license was made before LLMs. Now they use derivatives of my work without attribution as required by the license.

Even if I change the license, it won’t be respected, and nothing else will change. To me, that’s copyright infringement on me, ignoring the hours I put in.

On a separate note, LLMs only produce more of the same, ignoring the environmental and economic impacts. Often, more of the same is not what we need. It leads to the same mistakes being made. I’ve never used LLM to code, never will.

Statement of fact. Claude was engineered with copyright material.

Open source, but made with a copyright infringing LLM.

Talking about the problems and circumstances people face which may lead to substance use (including alcohol and THC) is still stigmatised and socially taboo in the community compared to the simplistic conversation about effects of substance use.

Can you imagine if we all spoke openly about the problems and various forms of abuse, neglect and violence in the community?

I’m professionally neck deep in this, and still people turn to coping mechanisms before opening up. It’s rather sad.