I think this is a first step in the right direction. Let's see what
happens.

On Sat, Nov 1, 2025, 10:48 AM Udhay Shankar N via Silklist <
[email protected]> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 7:42 PM Bruce Metcalf via Silklist <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > https://vanderessen.com/posts/hopl/ <https://vanderessen.com/posts/hopl/
>> >
>> >
>> > <quote>
>> > The idea is that any software published under this license would be
>> > forbidden to be used by AI. The scope of the AI ban is maximal. It is
>> > forbidden for AI to analyze the source code, but also to use the
>> > software. Even indirect use of the software is forbidden. If, for
>> > example, a backend system were to include such software, it would be
>> > forbidden for AI to make requests to such a system.
>> > </quote>
>>
>> Nice concept, but I think it's going to be prohibitively difficult to
>> enforce, particularly for public-facing applications.
>>
>
> I think the greatest utility value of such an approach would be as a line
> in the sand.  In the ideal case, the ones who would be more likely to abide
> by it would be large corporations, because they have the most to lose.
> (there may have to be a couple of well-publicized lawsuits before this
> happens, but this kind of license is step 1 in that process).
>
> Udhay
> --
> Silklist mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mailman.panix.com/listinfo.cgi/silklist
>
-- 
Silklist mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman.panix.com/listinfo.cgi/silklist

Reply via email to