@tante I understand the sentiment, it is so very, very tiring.

Yet, I hold out hope, because I have seen the future.

Our twins are second year in elementary, their teacher used to use ChatGPT to give them homework. The assignments were full of misspellings and other errors (ChatGPT sucks at Hungarian). We helped the kids correct those mistakes, and when they showed their homework, the teacher saw the red lines under the mistakes, and the corrections - also in red. Kids didn't say anything. Didn't call her out. They made her uncomfortable.

By the next week, the entire class was doing this, and the teacher stopped using ChatGPT. By the end of the month, the entire school was having great fun correcting AI mistakes.

Today, "AI", for the kids, is synonymous with "liar", "idiot", "wrong", "bad". And they teach it to their parents. I've seen some of them turn, and it's becoming harder and harder to be pro-AI in our little town. Being one is considered ridiculous.

It's a small thing. But it gives me hope.

@thomasfuchs this is what happens when you¹ feed git-flow and github's own docs through a plagiarism machine.

@imcdowall @petrillic As far as I understand the EUPL, it is closer to the AGPL than to regular GPL.

The copyleft clause in section 5 covers both distribution and communication of original & derived works. It defines communication of works in section 1 as:

— ‘Distribution’ or ‘Communication’: any act of selling, giving, lending, renting, distributing, communicating, transmitting, or otherwise making available, online or offline, copies of the Work or providing access to its essential functionalities at the disposal of any other natural or legal person.

So that makes it very AGPL-like, in my reading. But: I'm a mere nerd, not a lawyer.

@petrillic Would the EUPL-1.2 work? It's a copyleft license, similar in spirit to the GPL, but without RMS.