This was on the front page a few days ago and the consensus seemed to be this project is unethical:<p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35740836" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35740836</a>
So the group that relied on stealing and ripping the licenses off of software to build their project is upset that people are using their product in a way they don't like?<p>That's some amazing hypocrisy.
Fuck this guy, we finally have a super popular web service that runs off of a pay for value model instead of ads and this guy goes and shits in the punch bowl.
If you don't want your API to be used don't expose it to the world.<p>We've seen so many "If you don't want your art to train AI don't post it on the web", I think it's faire
The author of the article doesn't know that OpenAI's language model is called GPT-4, that's with s dash. This in turn makes GPT4free seem even closer related to GPT-4, which it isn't. GPT4free existed way before GPT-4 was announced as far as I know. On top of that, GPT is not OpenAI trademark.
The lengths people need to go to because OpEnAI isnt allowing people to use the GPT4 API.<p>Its been 1+ month and still no API access for me? Can't really blame it on demand anymore.<p>Will be overjoyed when we get a non facebook licensed LLM that is 95% of the quality to run locally.
"Xtekky said that he has advised all the sites that wrote to him that they should secure their APIs, but none of them has done so"<p>Lock your door so I don't come into your home and get your stuff.
Is the threat for copyright infringement? That would be my guess and probably make the most sense. I think the push back here might be a bit of a red herring if what they're objecting to is the name "GPT4free".<p>It would be nice to know what the actual legal request was.