So they are "renewing the brand", appointed a committee but the post does not mention anything concrete at all apart from AI FOMO.
Stackoverflow's problem is that they did not push back on AI right from the start. Instead, they launched hundreds of surveys where they tried to extract from developers that they want AI.
Well, they don't. People don't like their free work under the Creative Commons License to be sold to "Open"AI under a partnership.
Is the recent lockdown with captchas designed to grant "Open"AI a monopoly over the stolen Creative Commons contributions? Is that the goal of the rebranding?
TLDR: it seems like they don’t want to, but there was enough uproar when they tried to stop that they reluctantly brought them back, behind a dubious clickthrough agreement which asserts “should I distribute this file for the purpose of LLM training, Stack Overflow reserves the right to decline to allow me access to future downloads.”
Stackoverflow's problem is that they did not push back on AI right from the start. Instead, they launched hundreds of surveys where they tried to extract from developers that they want AI.
Well, they don't. People don't like their free work under the Creative Commons License to be sold to "Open"AI under a partnership.
Is the recent lockdown with captchas designed to grant "Open"AI a monopoly over the stolen Creative Commons contributions? Is that the goal of the rebranding?