This. I am so demoralised as a SWE who was trying to get out of working for a morally objectionable company by working on passion projects and selling them as apps. Guess I need to find something else… again.
Depends. Hand-written apps will still be more valuable than slopped ones as they’re far more trustworthy and less generic (like, literally), not to mention people being environmentally conscious about their choices. A good, trustworthy app that respects the user (and therefore omits e.g. privacy invasion) is still worth a few bucks to many.
I don’t mean this to be snippy but people don’t give a shit how or who wrote the code.
Most people will never know either way. If you download an app from an app store you don’t know what the code looks like.
Also software devs like to think they are clever and valuable because big tech has been pumping them up for a couple decades but the business doesn’t actually give a shit how a feature gets implemented only that it was and the customers value it.
LLMs are perfectly capable of writing correct code. The main issue with them is the pace of change which has been greatly accelerated and how it can eclipse the rate a dev can understand the change.
I know people like to claim that every thing they make is slop but that ignores that basically the entire industry is using it to varying amounts and are unlikely to stop going forward.
You are right no one cares how it is implemented, and on select contexts, right that LLMs can produce sufficient implementation.
However it isn’t generally the case that they can produce quality software. The bad news for a lot of developers is that by volume most software isn’t exactly great quality either, particularly in house enterprise software is already crap, so there is large area where differently crapi isn’t so bad.
I will say that people who want their software well supported are likely to be ill served by “vibed” solutions. It is really tricky to debug complex software that was vibed, whether human or GenAI. If it worked perfectly the first time around and/or the software in question is fairly disposable, well those may be fine.
Yeah it is great for POC. Basically something that you show as a demo and then throw it away.
I saw one mod for a Minecraft where author was honest and wrote upfront something like “please don’t report any bugs, this mod was vibe coded and I don’t have the skills to fix it”
I do care, i want to get work done, not waste my time with slop applications. All this talk about the adobe suit being cloned and in practice it is less usable than gimp and other open source projects out there, so why waste my time, with another slop marketing stunt?
Techbros always pretend the public doesn’t value efficiency and integration, and are willing to pay for it. If it wasn’t this way open source apps would have crushed it’s competition decades ago simply for being free.
And don’t get me started in how without proper support these slop apps will be dead faster than the grokopedia.
Software is subject to copyright. Yes you can implement the same APIs, but when you get into the visual presentation, things can get copyright related even if the code isn’t being ripped off.
If you decompile rather than clone, well then the code is copyrighted even if transformed into plausible source code.
The way I unterstand it, at least in European practice, the code itself is copyrighted, as in, the actual text, not the concept behing it. Decompiled source is not the same as original source, it goes through rounds of compiler optimisations and the process of reversing that includes a lot of guesswork. So, in practice, decompiling and working on the decompiled source was at least tolerated, probably because it would have been a grey area at worst.
In terms of whether the ‘clean room’ approach is as critical in Europe or not, I can’t be sure. It might be more permissable for someone to use a decompile as a reference and also directly work on a replacement. However I’m pretty sure starting with a decompile of proprietary software as a direct codebase would run afoul of issues.
Otherwise, imagine you have an HEVC encoded rip of a 4K blu ray. You transcode it to AV1. The bytes are totally different, and even the resultant frames are likely not even pixel for pixel identical. I don’t think copyright law would deem that not a violation, regardless of jurisdiction.
Transcoding would not be a violation, but in order to rip it in the first place, you had to bypass technological restrictions built into the disc and the drive. Under section 1201 of the DMCA, the creation or sharing of software that can do thatis a felony punishable by half a million dollars and six months in prison for a first offense.
Resharing your transcode would be a violation, even assuming the original was somehow an unencumbered HEVC. Ripping a VHS and encoding would still be a violation even without any DMCA complications
I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, as should be obvious by me being a random dude on the internet.
you can kind of sue about breaches of contract, but that’s civil law, not criminal law, so not illegal
unless I profit from that or use it to defame <redacted>, they might have a hard time demonstrating their damages from that breach
I didn’t sign any contract with <redacted> over their firmware anyway, and it will be hard to prove for them that I did, so kiss my ass
I’m not in the US, neither is <redacted> so the DMCA can kiss my ass as well
there are people who do this kind of work above-board, mostly in academic contexts, with their name attached to it, and as far as I can see they still walk around freely
This. I am so demoralised as a SWE who was trying to get out of working for a morally objectionable company by working on passion projects and selling them as apps. Guess I need to find something else… again.
Depends. Hand-written apps will still be more valuable than slopped ones as they’re far more trustworthy and less generic (like, literally), not to mention people being environmentally conscious about their choices. A good, trustworthy app that respects the user (and therefore omits e.g. privacy invasion) is still worth a few bucks to many.
I don’t mean this to be snippy but people don’t give a shit how or who wrote the code.
Most people will never know either way. If you download an app from an app store you don’t know what the code looks like.
Also software devs like to think they are clever and valuable because big tech has been pumping them up for a couple decades but the business doesn’t actually give a shit how a feature gets implemented only that it was and the customers value it.
LLMs are perfectly capable of writing correct code. The main issue with them is the pace of change which has been greatly accelerated and how it can eclipse the rate a dev can understand the change.
I know people like to claim that every thing they make is slop but that ignores that basically the entire industry is using it to varying amounts and are unlikely to stop going forward.
It’s a confirmation bias thing.
You are right no one cares how it is implemented, and on select contexts, right that LLMs can produce sufficient implementation.
However it isn’t generally the case that they can produce quality software. The bad news for a lot of developers is that by volume most software isn’t exactly great quality either, particularly in house enterprise software is already crap, so there is large area where differently crapi isn’t so bad.
I will say that people who want their software well supported are likely to be ill served by “vibed” solutions. It is really tricky to debug complex software that was vibed, whether human or GenAI. If it worked perfectly the first time around and/or the software in question is fairly disposable, well those may be fine.
Yeah it is great for POC. Basically something that you show as a demo and then throw it away.
I saw one mod for a Minecraft where author was honest and wrote upfront something like “please don’t report any bugs, this mod was vibe coded and I don’t have the skills to fix it”
I do care, i want to get work done, not waste my time with slop applications. All this talk about the adobe suit being cloned and in practice it is less usable than gimp and other open source projects out there, so why waste my time, with another slop marketing stunt?
Techbros always pretend the public doesn’t value efficiency and integration, and are willing to pay for it. If it wasn’t this way open source apps would have crushed it’s competition decades ago simply for being free.
And don’t get me started in how without proper support these slop apps will be dead faster than the grokopedia.
Keep in mind that all of these projects cost a fuckton of money. This cannot go on forever.
You only need to slay the giants…
I think its over for us, and most other knowledge based jobs eventually. I have no idea where this is going.
If someone does that to an app you’re actively selling you’re well within your rights to C&D them.
Reverse engineering isn’t illegal. It’s how projects like Wine are possible.
Well, depends.
Software is subject to copyright. Yes you can implement the same APIs, but when you get into the visual presentation, things can get copyright related even if the code isn’t being ripped off.
If you decompile rather than clone, well then the code is copyrighted even if transformed into plausible source code.
Of course then there are patents…
The way I unterstand it, at least in European practice, the code itself is copyrighted, as in, the actual text, not the concept behing it. Decompiled source is not the same as original source, it goes through rounds of compiler optimisations and the process of reversing that includes a lot of guesswork. So, in practice, decompiling and working on the decompiled source was at least tolerated, probably because it would have been a grey area at worst.
In terms of whether the ‘clean room’ approach is as critical in Europe or not, I can’t be sure. It might be more permissable for someone to use a decompile as a reference and also directly work on a replacement. However I’m pretty sure starting with a decompile of proprietary software as a direct codebase would run afoul of issues.
Otherwise, imagine you have an HEVC encoded rip of a 4K blu ray. You transcode it to AV1. The bytes are totally different, and even the resultant frames are likely not even pixel for pixel identical. I don’t think copyright law would deem that not a violation, regardless of jurisdiction.
Transcoding would not be a violation, but in order to rip it in the first place, you had to bypass technological restrictions built into the disc and the drive. Under section 1201 of the DMCA, the creation or sharing of software that can do thatis a felony punishable by half a million dollars and six months in prison for a first offense.
Resharing your transcode would be a violation, even assuming the original was somehow an unencumbered HEVC. Ripping a VHS and encoding would still be a violation even without any DMCA complications
That is explicitly prohibited by virtually all proprietary software license agreements.
Which makes it a breach of contract, but not illegal.
I have news for you about breaches of contract. They can be sued over.
Also DMCA 1201 is a thing which often makes reverse engineering a felony.
I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, as should be obvious by me being a random dude on the internet.