There is a large gap between public domain and GPL. For starters if Copilot is emitting GPL code for closed source projects... that's copyright infringement.
Copyright infringement is emitting the code. The license gives you permission to emit the code, under certain conditions. If you don't meet the conditions, it's still copyright infringement like before.
Copyright infringement could be emitting the code in a manner that exceeds fair use.
The license gives you permission to utilize the code in a certain way. If Copilot gives you GPLed code that you then put into your closed source project, you have infringed the license, not Copilot.
> If you don't meet the conditions, it's still copyright infringement like before.
Licensing and copyright are two separate things. Neither has anything to do with the other. You can be in compliance with copyright, but out of license compliance, you can be the reverse. But nothing about copyright infringement here is tied to licensing.
To be clear: I am a person who trashed his Reddit account when they said they were going to license that text for training (trashed in the sense of "ran a script that scrubbed each of my comments first with nonsense edits, then deleted them"). I am a photographer who has significant concerns with training other models on people's creative output. I have similar concerns about Copilot.
But confusing licensing and copyright here only muddies waters.
Justine was kicked out of llama.cpp for introducing changes before the rest of the maintainers approved them.
Much drama has been had since then and I've lost interest in both projects.
It's just been exhausting wanting to build good software without ego in this space. Everyone is trying to get rich quick before the inevitable AI ice age starts and all these skills are again useless.
The last commit from Justine I can see to the llama.cpp repo is a week ago, so whatever drama there was appear to have been at a minimum partially resolved.
why would being russian make it this? it could be if it was made in any country. they did this attack once, okay? but its not like other countries dont pay attention.
"Bureau of Meteorology hacked by foreign spies in massive malware attack, report shows"
Clearly someone has an interest in targeting it - who knows if HTTPS would actually mitigate the risks though. Doubt it would hurt and would not be that difficult. It shows the lack of maintaince in BOM that leads to events like this.
Which again might be a reason why their upgrade from a old (hackable) OpenSSL to a newer version with limited budget might take a longer while. And the short term fix: Let us do only HTTP.
Except Montana, and afaik other places, banned forms of nicotine vaping in response to this. Also the general public seems to think it's related to nicotine, not thc.
Considering how the majority of the news releases and articles were written, it is not surprising that fear of vaping itself is the idea that remains in people's minds.
