PhilipTheBucket
Also inside the uploaded source code was some GPL 2 source code, which renders the not-very-open WCL moot.
Wait a second. That casts the whole thing in a different light. They’re now obligated to either stop distributing the thing in any form, or else open-source the entire thing whether they want to or not. Right?
I haven’t played around with GPT o1; I just checked, and I don’t have access. I’m not saying it’s necessarily bad without having experienced it. But OpenAI has been getting steadily worse for a while, so I’m assuming that the stuff I’ve interacted with is indicative of the quality of the new stuff. It’s all of a piece.
You can use Creative Commons. You’ll still have the copyright to the work, so you can relicense it or do whatever you like with it, but they’ll have a particular and proscribed set of things they are guaranteed to be able to do with it into perpetuity.
Choose whichever license suits what you’d like to be able to grant them, in terms of whether they have to credit you for it, whether they’re allowed to modify it, and so on. CC BY lets them do whatever they want, as long as they credit you, which is a common permissive option.
This is excellent. Additions:
- !imaginary@reddthat.com
- !astrophotography@lemmy.world
- !analog_horror_footage@lemmy.world
- !pareidolia@sh.itjust.works
- !historyartifacts@lemmy.world
- !historyillustrations@lemmy.world
- !historicalpropaganda@lemmy.blahaj.zone
- !StableDiffusion@fedia.io
- !photography@fedia.io
- !inktober@sh.itjust.works
- !photomode@feddit.uk
- !photography@lemmy.ml
- !LoLFanArt@fedia.io
- !accidentalrenaissance@lemmy.world
- !historyporn@lemmy.world