Timeline for New blog post from our CEO Prashanth: Community is the future of AI
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 6 at 20:05 | comment | added | bta | People post GPLed content here, regardless of what the rules say. That doesn't change the license. Also, for many years, the site let you select the license of content when you posted it, and GPL was one of the options. SE force-migrated everything on the site to the CC license at one point, but there have always been serious legal doubts as to whether that move was legal. There's a significant amount of content here that is most likely still subject to the GPL. | |
| Dec 5 at 21:41 | comment | added | Shadow Wizard | "wanting to build an AI answer-bot". And Here It Is | |
| Jun 2, 2023 at 4:49 | comment | added | starball | also related: Is Stack Exchange's CC-BY-SA v3.0 content compatible with the GPL? (about the older CC-BY-SA 3.0 license) | |
| Jun 2, 2023 at 4:46 | comment | added | starball | "There's a lot of content on this site [...] licensed under the GPL or similar. When I include part of that code in a question/answer, that's a derivative work and thus also GPLed" I'm not a lawyer, but I thought you weren't supposed to do that? Content on SE is CC-BY-SA, so wouldn't you be breaking the code's license by publishing it under a different, incompatible license? Or are they actually compatible? I'm only aware of adapting from CC-BY-SA 4.0 content and relicensing under GPL3 to be ok (link) | |
| Jun 2, 2023 at 4:42 | comment | added | starball | I doubt this. for one thing, I assume the content and value of SOfT instances is based on business-internal knowledge. I don't see how data from SO/SE is useful to that in any way that's more useful that a generalized LLM model like in ChatGPT. | |
| Jun 2, 2023 at 4:29 | history | answered | bta | CC BY-SA 4.0 |