Hacker News

points by buster 1 day ago | 0 comments

Well.. Old discussion but I actually think it's the better way (sorry. MIT, you are more free then anything). Either contribute back or stay away from open source work that others did for you.

[–] thisismyanon2 1 day ago

Can you even copyright LLM output? Even the readme points out humans didn't make any of the code.

[–] ZoomZoomZoom 1 day ago

In this case you just can't spin it any other way than it being a derivative work of Blender. And this is great.

[–] wtetzner 1 day ago

My understanding is that the LLM stripped away the non-UI code from Blender. The majority of the code is ported directly from GPL'd code from the Blender code base.

[–] the__alchemist 1 day ago

Most software is not GPL. When comparing this to alternatives like EGUI and GPUI for building a new app, this cannot be considered, while the others can.

GPL makes sense for applications like Blender. For a general purpose library, it's a dealbreaker.

[–] ogoffart 1 day ago

It depends on what you're building. If your app is free software, a GPL library is no problem at all. (and your own code can even stay MIT or Apache.)

It "cannot be considered" only for proprietary apps.

[–] BowBun 1 day ago

This is not the spirit of open source.