And then after doing all that you still need to confirm a scary warning every single time you install an app. As if it wasn’t enough.

The video game Eve Online, a game about spaceships, had a screen listing all spaceships in the game and their stats.

It went by it’s acronym, which stood for Interbus Ship Identification System.

It had since been renamed.

But imagine the outrage if a terrorist group actually marked their payments like this – maybe the day before their suicide attack – with the thought that what does it matter anyway they won’t be here to be investigated.

And the bank didn’t investigate. The bank would be fined to hell and back and lose all trust, because they couldn’t do “the bare minimum” in finding something this obvious.

Yeah, and currently you don’t need to know what an apk is to install them.

A VPN to me is a way to prevent my ISP from seeing I torrent and to go around geoblocks. It’s not a privacy tool at all. So yeah, I’m evaluating them from that angle.

From what angle is it easy to do?

• Enable developer mode (using a hidden process where you have to know where to find it)
• Go through a scary form
• Restart the device
• Wait 24 hours?!
• Go to the settings again
• Do some more scary confirmations
• Check another scary checkbox
• And then… confirm again every single time you install an app

And you are telling me it’s easy to do? I can go publish a diet tracking app and Aunt Flo will happily go through this and I won’t lose customers?

I feel like anything you want to get that’s not on the Play Store, you’re gonna be savvy enough to install.

Yes, that’s my point. Google making it so that you have to be a tech savvy user to install anything from outside the Play Store is why there is nothing outside the Play Store that a non-tech savvy user would be interested in, because why would there be if no one is going to install it anyway. Fortnite was a big example where you had to download the APK from their website, and they sued Google that it was too hard for users. And it was before these changes which make it incredibly harder.

They also know it’s you when you don’t use it. I’m not sure how is it worse? Seems like a handy way to go around geoblocks.

Did they? I read the article and the conclusion is they got fined but didn’t admit to anything, nor was any proof shown that they did anything. The whole thing was about Siri getting activated by ambient noise.

Exactly, you see thousands of irrelevant ads every day and think nothing of it, then when 1 time an ad gets lucky, you will use it as proof “they are listening” forever after.

I had the same thing happen with billboards. I learned about some new thing I have never heard about before, and wouldn’t you know it shortly after I saw a billboard selling it. The ad companies must be on top of their game, they are nor only listening to everything I say, they can print and install a whole billboard on the side of a building within minutes just before I go here.

Yeah, but that malware flappy bird clone does need to ask for the microphone permission, and the clueless user does need to click agree, that yes they want Free Flappy Bird 100% Legit Pro to have access to their microphone. Yes it happens. But that’s not what people mean they say that you should use a flip phone and get the battery out when you are not using it otherwise it’s listening to you. No it’s not listening to you unless you explicitly gave an app permission to listen to you.

No, you do this and then you can’t install anything, because no developer will choose this process as their publishing strategy.

Apps outside the Play Store will be dead, which is the point.

That’s already the case. The new thing is that they want developers to share their ID to have their apps be installable on Android in the first place, even if they don’t use the Play Store.

Then what did you mean when you said:

the output will always be in the public domain

It seems to me like a pretty clear statement.

I’m saying that the rewrite of chardet infringes on the copyright of the original work. That is neither MIT licensed nor public domain. It’s illegally reproduced and distributed copyrighted work.

That I never disputed, I’m not interested about chardet or whatever happened here, I’m interested about your comment that LLM output is always public domain, and if so, whether it could be used to achieve the goal of reimplementing a library so that it achieves the same purpose but isn’t bound by the original license, if you do it without infringing on the copyright of the original work.

That all makes sense to me, all I meant is that you are answering the relicense question literally, which I don’t think actually matters. The situation we are pondering is that someone wants to free a project from it’s original license.

They are claiming they did a magic trick with an LLM and now the project is MIT licensed. And you are saying that it’s not, it’s public domain. But the distinction is immaterial to the person’s goal. Whether the author is right or you are right, the project is no longer under its original license, and whether that is something that can happen is the actual question here, regardless if the resulting output can be licensed or not.

That’s not the same at all though. Complaining about AI “features” being shoved down users throat, and AI being used by developers are very different things.

Both can be complained about, absolutely, but they are completely different things.

If Microsoft was using all artisanal human written code to deliver all the AI crap, I wouldn’t be complaining about it any less.

Yes, but what does that have to do with LLM output being not copyrightable?

So you are agreeing using the LLM worked? Because that’s what the author wanted: generate a freely usable version that is no longer bound by copyright or the original license.

You should tell that to Linus Torvalds, he’s developing the Linux kernel without using GitHub at all. I’m sure he will appreciate being told git is insuffient to develop a good product and write good code, the best practice is to use a Microsoft service in a particular way and nothing else can work.

Tell me, when I work on a project alone, who am I exactly requesting to pull my code and why do I need to use a feature of some git hosting website instead of reviewing, checking, debugging, merging, and reverting if necessary my change locally and using my CI/CD?

How dare you. If it’s your last thought then you are clearly not answering the question and thinking about how you can do better afterwards!