[johnofthesea]

> AI is eroding copyright, so there may no longer be a need for the GPL. GNU should stop and rethink its stance, chuck away the GPL as the main tool to fight evil software corporations and embrace LLM as the main weapon.

Is this LLM thing freely available or is it owned and controlled by these companies? Are we going to rent the tools to fight "evil software corporations"?

[Aozora7]

There already are LLMs with open weights that are better at code than state of the art closed source models from a year ago. For now, you most people may have to rent the hardware to run those models, since it's too expensive for most people to own something that can run inference on one trillion parameters, but I wouldn't consider LLMs to be controlled by "evil software corporations" at this point.

[lkjdsklf]

> There already are LLMs with open weights that are better at code than state of the art closed source models from a year ago.

A year ago, the "state of the art" models were total turds. So this isn't exactly good news

Not to mention the performance of local LLMs makes them utterly unusable unless you have multiple tens of thousands to invest in hardware (and that was before the recent price spike). If you're using commodity hardware, they're just awful to use.

[josephg]

Open models do exist. They’re nowhere near aa good as frontier models, but they’re getting better all the time.

It’s probably only a matter of time before open models are as good as Claude code is today.

[Aozora7]

With the release of GLM-5, I would say that they are pretty much almost as good. Basically 90% as good as Opus 4.6 on most tasks for 20% of inference cost, and open weights.

[cozzyd]

easy, we ask Claude to write an open-source freely-available version of Claude with equal or better capabilities.

[vips7L]

Make no mistakes.