[N-Krause]

The article linked here is a consequence of the actions taken against the repository linked by OP, not a more 'credible source'.

The file linked in by OP, is the main argument by Pawel Jarczak why his fork does not violate any copyright laws (may it be written by/with help of AI or not).

[wlkr]

I didn't say it was necessarily more credible, although I understand that was mentioned further up.

Personally I found the article (not the tweets) much more useful to understand the context of all this, as someone very out of the loop. Certianly more useful to me than a long list of very specific, in my option largely LLM output, points about a codebase I'm entirely unfamiliar with with claims that seem to need a legal team and court case to be meaningful. Slop is somewhat unfair and I'm happy to be disagreed with.

[marcosscriven]

Indeed. It’s not clear at all to me that this is a better or even equivalent post to the one I submitted.