The software-dev community is many orders of magnitude too small to keep the bubble inflated.

And in fact #genAI works way better on code than on actual human language. Because the vocabulary is so much smaller and “doing the same as everyone else already has” is actually a good engineering practice.

So…

And, that's the software dev community, where (whether you like it or not) there are many people who are willing to spend, in aggregate, (a small number) of billions of dollars.

So, the investor community looks at that, gets dollar signs in their eyes, and says “Software is hard and GenAI is doing great there, so the rest of the world will pick it up, fer sure. Take my money, Sam!”

Except for…

So, more #genAI pain. By and large, the bubble's a bubble because the number of people out there in the business community who like it enough to be willing to pay for zillions of tokens, in aggregate trillions of dollars, is pretty small despite frantic pushing, and thus eventually it all pops.

There is an exception…

@bkuhn @ossguy The surprising thing about saying "seriously consider cautiously and carefully incorporating their workflows with ours" is that it doesn't address at all my *biggest* fear: the copyright status of LLM generated contributions seems currently unsettled.

I know there's been assertions to the contrary floating around: the Supreme Court deferred to a lower court in the US. However that is not the same thing as the Supreme Court making a specific decision. And internationally, the copyright situation of output is even murkier... it will take a long time for this to settle.

Does Conservancy not think this is the case? I would be surprised if so, but perhaps you all have an interpretation that I am not currently aware of.

If there *is* concern, then we hit a serious risk: we may be seeing many contributions with legal status which has *yet to be determined* entering seasoned codebases. And this worries me a lot.

@bkuhn @ossguy I have to admit that I am pretty surprised by this post. Not in terms of being welcoming to newcomers, which is something I have advocated for and made the center of all of my FOSS work.

However, the post says the following:

> I encourage all of us in the FOSS community to welcome the new software developers who've adopted these tools, investigate their motivations, and seriously consider cautiously and carefully incorporating their workflows with ours.

While the sentence which follows acknowledges that "seasoned software developers understand the benefits and limitations of LLM-assisted coding tools", there are two big things I expected at least acknowledged:

- Many maintainers are facing *burnout* over the situation. However, I agree that addressing this in terms of norms is something we can consider
- The biggest thing I am surprised to not see addressed at all is the licensing and copyright implications

(cotd)

@koalie good luck 🤞🏼

@evan I think Topics could just as well have the same rational, and it's interesting to me that it has scored so low so far.

@evan i picked people, because ultimately federation is the implementation detail and people communicating is the reason why any of us are here, not vice versa. buuut it really depends on what the diagram is meant to communicate and to whom

#3615MyLife Big news!
Wish me luck please, because today… I signed a firm purchase offer on a house! \o/
I hope the plan comes together 🤞
Here’s a preview.
It even has a name! “Hego Alde” means “region of the south” in Basque. The south from the other side, that is.

@rickscully Thank you!