Transcription
You might not like what I'm about to say, but please don't shoot the messenger. I just learned about this Malice software, M A L U S. And the idea here is that you essentially rip off open- source software.
Wait, just to be super clear, I'm an open- source guy. I fully believe in open source. My Leonard project is open source. I believe in open source, but it has challenges because you have people maintaining open source. They're not getting paid to do it. So, the industry is essentially saying open source is dead because of this. And when you step back and think about what's happening, it kind of makes sense. You have an open- source codebase. You point Malice at that. Malice is going to use an agent structure, a harness to create a very detailed spec of that open source software. Another agent is going to write new software from that spec. And then the output of agent number two is essentially different or legally separated from the very first open- source codebase that was like ripped off. You still with me here?
The same could be said of any real world widget. So this part here was made in CAD and then it was machined. You could very easily create a spec of what this is from its geometry and then have an agent harness create the thing from CAD using a CAD kernel and output the finished requirements of this part and then you've just created a new part based on some other inspiration but you created a specification in between. So now the thing that was always proprietary can be recreated by AI. And this applies to just about anything. It could be software, it could be the part, could be like artwork which we're already seeing, right? You can prompt using midjourney prompt artwork that is in the style or the spirit of other art and essentially you could make it completely identical.
We humans seem to be cancelling AI recently. So whether or not we like this, I think is irrelevant. This is the state-of-the-art in technology. So we have two options here. We stop. We have like coronal mass ejection solar flare type thing nuke where we roll all technology back. This is like put on a little hoodie in the sunglasses, go to our cabin in the woods, do that type of thing. I don't think that's good for society. That's not tenable. That's not something that will solve our problem.
The other side of the coin is we move forward into this brave new world of technology where IP, patents, ideas are essentially free, like I've been saying, and there's no way to patent or secure those ideas. What's going to be fighting intellectual property moving forward? Well, let's start with public disclosure. You're going to have videos like mine that have wide reach, hundreds of thousands of people, and I just spout ideas every minute of the day. If one of those ideas you try to claim it in a patent, that's technically was public disclosure and anybody else who saw this or myself could come after you and try to nullify your patent. I'm not saying we would, but you're going to pay lawyers a lot of money to try to fence off all of that little turf that was in the public domain.
The other thing is what I said in the beginning of this video, software like Malice, which essentially just completely recreates something from a spec or in my case of Promptly 3D, we can reverse engineer create anything out of CAD from just seeing it or using it in real life and recreating a specification. Like, how do you possibly protect ideas and patents? And should you even? This was a very heavy short here and there's a lot to talk about. Thanks for watching. Adios.