Shamar @Shamar@social.cleverlibre.org

Sketch of The Analytical Engine invented by Charles #Babbage.

The notes of #AdaLovelace are really REALLY something any programmer should read.

In particular, the famous Note G first lines are prophetic.

```
It is desirable to guard against the possibility of exaggerated ideas that might arise as to the powers of the Analytical Engine. In considering any new subject, there is frequently a tendency, first, to overrate what we find to be already interesting or remarkable; and, secondly, by a sort of natural reaction, to undervalue the true state of the case, when we do discover that our notions have surpassed those that were really tenable.

The Analytical Engine has no pretensions whatever to originate anything. It can do whatever we know how to order it to perform. It can follow analysis; but it has no power of anticipating any analytical relations or truths. Its province is to assist us in making available what we are already acquainted with. This it is calculated to effect primarily and chiefly of course, through its executive faculties; but it is likely to exert an indirect and reciprocal influence on science itself in another manner. For, in so distributing and combining the truths and the formulæ of analysis, that they may become most easily and rapidly amenable to the mechanical combinations of the engine, the relations and the nature of many subjects in that science are necessarily thrown into new lights, and more profoundly investigated. This is a decidedly indirect, and a somewhat speculative, consequence of such an invention. It is however pretty evident, on general principles, that in devising for mathematical truths a new form in which to record and throw themselves out for actual use, views are likely to be induced, which should again react on the more theoretical phase of the subject. There are in all extensions of human power, or additions to human knowledge, various collateral influences, besides the main and primary object attained.
```

http://www.fourmilab.ch/babbage/sketch.html

@rysiek

The argument about the derivative work is plain wrong, and I'm really surprised that Julia Reda wrote something like this.¹

```
On the other hand, the argument that the outputs of GitHub Copilot are derivative works of the training data is based on the assumption that a machine can produce works. This assumption is wrong and counterproductive. Copyright law has only ever applied to intellectual creations – where there is no creator, there is no work. This means that machine-generated code like that of GitHub Copilot is not a work under copyright law at all, so it is not a derivative work either. The output of a machine simply does not qualify for copyright protection – it is in the public domain. That is good news for the open movement and not something that needs fixing.
```

The output of a compiler is under the copyright of the authors of the sources because the machine does NOT add anything creative, but only apply an algorithmic transform to the sources.

Thus the output of a compiler is under the copyright of the authors of the sources.

Similarly a zip containing the sources is under the #copyright of the authors of the sources.

The training of #GitHubCopilot's model just did the same: it turned sources under their authors' copyright into a big opaque archive (aka blackbox #OpenAI) that can be queried through an API.

Thus the model is protected under the copyright of all the authors of the original sources.
And since such code were distributed under #AGPLv3 code, the whole model must be distributed within 30 days to prevent a termination of the license.

Sure, I'd be very happy to learn that zipping a book or ripping a dvd would end the rights of the copyright holders.

But if I cannot algorithmically transform #windows11 binaries, say by decompiling them, ending #Microsoft's right on the output, then Microsoft cannot transform my #AGPLv3 code without complying with the license.
____
¹ Or at least, I would have been surprised months ago, before she signed the "open letter" against #RMS to divide the #FreeSoftware movement

@tindall@cybre.space

@natecull

That's something that bother me too.

Types are logical predicates over memory areas (and maybe other resources).

They can be true or false and they can be kept true at compile time, checked at runtime or both.

Ultimately, inheritance is just implication: if A extends B, then all predicates that are true for a memory area of type B must be true for a memory area of type A too, so A => B.

Liskow substitution principle is just plain implication.

@oleotar@mastodon.uno

In realtà siamo molto più prevedibili di quanto ci piaccia pensare.

https://video.resolutions.it/videos/watch/c9b50e80-85de-4b62-bc3a-8f6501d26b65?start=0h59m40s

@quinta

ERRATA CORRIGE

"Neurons Act Not As Simple Logic Gates, But As Complex, Multi-Unit Processing Systems"

@guenther

#COPPA compliance is a US issue¹.
So if they do not own the whole copyright, such a new restriction terminates their #GPLv2 license.

The problem is that nobody is going to sue #Audacity's new owners and they will go away with that.

¹ but where was COPPA when #Google, #Microsoft, #Zoom and friends were collecting tons of biometric and personal data of kids all over the world during remote schooling in the pandemic?

@cypnk

I wonder.. if #GitHubCopilot can output original code (don't worry, it cannot... but follow the reasoning) why #Microsoft did not use #Windows11 sources to "train" it? Or maybe #IIS's or #Office365's one? Or #Azure sources.

Why violate the copyright and trust of #GitHub users? 🤔

```
There are two orthogonal forces at work in the Squeak team [...] the incremental improvement plane (which #AlanKey calls the "pink" plane) and the paradigm shift (or "blue") plane. [...]

The forces in the pink plane have to do with making an ever-better Smalltalk-80 system [...]

The forces in the blue plane have to do with [...] an exquisite personal comuputing environment. [...]

One aspect is that things must stay small and simple enough that they remain comprehensible and accessible to a single person.
```
From http://web.archive.org/web/20050406063507/http://squeak.org/about/headed-prev-vers.html

I'm always amazed to see how ancient is the quest for #simplicity.

#Jehanne, #Wirth's #Oberon, #TempleOS, #Squeak... we are all looking for the same Holy Grail, dreaming the same dream but in a different way...

@Alexmitter

Dude, you know nothing about #US hegemony in technology.

This would be in no way the worst they did or do.

@marie_joseph@eldritch.cafe

I think it's up to us to explain this.

A long time ago I started using "statistical programming" instead of AI, ML, DL and similar antropomorhic locutions.

I always explain that ANN are just peculiar virtual machines whose programs (the numerical matrices of weights and activation thresolds) are programmed statistically through data samples.

As far as I can see, people understand this quite well.

The calibration of an ANN (improperly named "training") is just a form of compilation: the readable data are turned into opaque binaries that only that specific topology can execute "correctly" (for whatever correctly can means in this context).

Calling it "statistical programming" makes it also clear programmers' responsibility and how fragile and bugged are the opaque programs.

@t0k

@Alexmitter

Yeah because #Microsoft is unable to automatically relates single files from a large project.

I mean... that would need NLP experts and a lot og expensive hardware! 🤣

Except in those languages that declare the module name at the beginning of each files, at least.

But sure, they "shall do no evil", right? 😇

@Alexmitter

How many ways are... fully legal like this?

You literally send them your code! On purpose! I mean... ok it's fooling dumb boys, but it's legal! You can't complain after!

@Alexmitter

1. It's called industrial #espionage.

But with #Copilot, #Microsoft will get access to codebases that are NOT under #GitHub.

The editor will send them the sources, one file after another.

@t0k