This is mostly true, but it depends on the license. Godot is MIT so they’re fine.
It usually depends if you link against/embed their code. For example if the library is GPL (LGPL is usually fine) then your game code may be liable to become GPL as well.
The moral of the story is to always check the license of your dependencies before distribution.
Oof I saw that on HN but didn’t read up on it yet.
I’m a supporter and defender of open source, but I do have to watch for these things regularly in my $dayjob. However I would never propose this as a workaround. All the issues of trusting AI generated code side, this is just disingenuous in my opinion.
This is mostly true, but it depends on the license. Godot is MIT so they’re fine.
It usually depends if you link against/embed their code. For example if the library is GPL (LGPL is usually fine) then your game code may be liable to become GPL as well.
The moral of the story is to always check the license of your dependencies before distribution.
Or just use https://malus.sh/
(I say this out of horror that such a thing exists)
This is clearly satire.
Oof I saw that on HN but didn’t read up on it yet.
I’m a supporter and defender of open source, but I do have to watch for these things regularly in my $dayjob. However I would never propose this as a workaround. All the issues of trusting AI generated code side, this is just disingenuous in my opinion.
It’s basically trading all the advantages of open source just to get rid of the license.
I also note it doesn’t appear to be working at the moment.
You might’ve “eaten the onion” a bit. It’s satire, read the full page cuz it’s actually a banger.
But I think a similar thing is actually happening at a larger scale with LLMs trained on FOSS code.
Also the increased demands put onto FOSS maintainers by vibe-coded contributions and by “AI-powered” analysis tools are a problem in their own right.
Is this a parody?