You do it as a hobby, that's fine. Some people do it for a living. And while they aren't owed a living doing that specific thing, it is going to be a big problem for them if they can't make money at it anymore.

I'm sure plenty of people feel the same way about software. They make software as a hobby and don't care about remuneration or credit. Meanwhile I write software for my day job and losing the ability to make money from it would be devastating.

▲

arjie 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Ah, I see. It’s just straightforward protectionism like dockworkers opposing automation and so on. That I do comprehend, in fact.

I write software too and I may no longer be able to just do it in the old way. Pretty scary world but also exciting. I can’t imagine trying to restrict LLM software writers on that basis but I can comprehend it as simply self-interest.

Fair enough.

▲

wat10000 an hour ago | parent [-]

Do you make money writing software? I bet you either try to restrict LLM usage or assign your rights to an employer who does. Putting code in the public domain is pretty rare, and extremely rare for paid work.

▲

arjie an hour ago | parent [-]

I allow them to train on my work as described here (for example) https://code.claude.com/docs/en/data-usage

And I do paste code into CC. I’m not super concerned that they’ll see it.

That’s fine by me. It doesn’t require putting code in the public domain which is something else entirely.

I make money off hosted software so in some sense there is writing involved at one end. But I’m not paid by output tokens.

	▲	wat10000 6 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		If your code isn't in the public domain, then anything you haven't explicitly allowed them to train on is restricted for them. They've been ignoring that for anything they can actually get their hands on, but it's there.