[norir]

> I'm a programmer, and I use automatic programming. The code I generate in this way is mine. My code, my output, my production. I, and you, can be proud.

I disagree. The code you wrote is a collaboration with the model you used. To frame it this way, you are taking credit for the work the model did on your behalf. There is a difference between I wrote this code entirely by myself and I wrote the code with a partner. For me, it is analogous to the author of the score of an opera taking credit for the libretto because they gave the libretto author the rough narrative arc. If you didn't do it yourself, it isn't yours.

I generally prefer integrated works or at least ones that clearly acknowledge the collaboration and give proper credit.

[bitwize]

The way I put it is: AI assistance in programming is a service, not a tool. It's like you're commissioning the code to be written by an outside shop. A lot of companies do this with human programmers, but when you commission OpenAI or Anthropic, the code they provide was written by machine.

[catdog]

Also it's not only the work of "the model" it's the work of human beings the model is trained on, often illegally.

[sneak]

Copyright infringement is a tort. “Illegal” is almost always used to refer to breaking of criminal law.

This seems like intentionally conflating them to imply that appropriating code for model training is a criminal offense, when, even in the most anti-AI, pro-IP view, it is plainly not.

[topaz0]

> “Illegal” is almost always used to refer to breaking of criminal law.

This is false, at least in general usage. It is very common to hear about civil offenses being referred to as illegal behavior.

[heavyset_go]

https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual...

[sneak]

> There are four essential elements to a charge of criminal copyright infringement. In order to sustain a conviction under section 506(a), the government must demonstrate: (1) that a valid copyright; (2) was infringed by the defendant; (3) willfully; and (4) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain.

I think it’s very much an open debate if training a model on publicly available data counts as infringement or not.

[heavyset_go]

I'm replying to your comment about infringement being a civil tort versus a crime, it can be both.

[iamsaitam]

Or for another analogy, just substitute the LLM for an outsourced firm. Instead of hiring a firm to do the work, you're hiring a LLM.

[Craighead]

How many JavaScript libraries does the average fortune 1000 developer invoke when programming?

[wernsey]

That average fortune 1000 developer is still expected to abide by the licensing terms of those libraries.

And in practice, tools like NPM makes sure to output all of the libraries' licenses.

[kledru]

I was about to argue, and then I suddenly remembered some past situations where a project manager clearly considered the code I wrote to be his achievement and proudly accepted the company's thanks.

[sneak]

Prompting the AI is indeed “do[ing] it yourself”. There’s nobody else here, and this code is original and never existed before, and would not exist here and now if I hadn’t prompted this machine.

[Thanemate]

Sure. But the sentence "I am a programmer" doesn't fit with prompting, just as much as me prompting for a drawing that resembles something doesn't make me a painter.

[FeteCommuniste]

Exactly. He's acting as something closer to a technical manager (who can dip into the code if need be but mostly doesn't) than a programmer.

[helloplanets]

So, what's your take on Andy Warhol, or sampling in music?

[keyle]

The line gets blurrier the more auto-complete you use.

Agentic programming is at the end of the day a higher level auto complete, with extremely fuzzy matching on English.

But when you write a block and you let copilot complete 3, 4, 5 statements. Are you really writing the code?

[simianwords]

Truth is the highest level of autocomplete