I want to release some open source code, but I don't want to make the mistake of training my replacement.
Are there any open source licenses that explicitly forbid use when training an AI?
Github/OpenAI's defense is "training ML systems on public data is fair use" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27678354). Unless this assertion gets invalidated in courts I think they mostly don't care about wordage in your license
> I want to release some open source code, but I don't want to make the mistake of training my replacement.
Most of a software engineer's value is not in the code they write. By far and large employers care instead that you solve their problems. Code's just a by-product, means to achieve that.
No, though plenty don’t license for that purpose and/or would require any work thereby created requiring w license to use the same license (e.g., all copyleft licenses).
But since Copilot and others use publicly available (independent or license, not specifically open-source) code on the basis that such use does not require a license, the license isn't going to stop them. Are you prepared to sue Microsoft to prevent them from using your code? If not, given their position on “Fair Use”, you aren't going to stop them.
I think this would likely fall foul of clause 6, in that using the software for training ML models would likely be considered a "field of endeavor". It's not the classic application of this clause (ie. "you can't use this software for military purposes", etc), but I think it'd still be covered.
Of course, IANAL, and your lawyer's opinion might differ.
Which means, you cannot limit the purposes for which your software is used.
If you wanted to prohibit it being used to train ML models, you could add this restriction to your license, but it would no longer be Open Source(TM).
In the past, programmers didn't have compilers, or linters, or debuggers, or dependency managers, or ... etc. All the tooling a modern programmer uses could be viewed as having taken work away from humans.
Just like these tools, AI will help you write more, better, code. There's a long way to go until we can generate software from an end-user's description of what they want done.
I don't dispute your point though. I just feel like it's more a matter of degree, rather than a binary now-you-do / now-you-don't situation.
If that was possible, would you really want to spend much of your life doing work that could be automated away?