Hacker News Reader

> How does that work?

My gut feeling is that any serious real-world company with a proprietary codebase worth looking at would not be handing out the crown jewels to a third party. License or not.

I don't doubt somebody licensed their codebase to them, I just have my doubts about who the "who" could be.

View on HN

Code isn't worth all that much if you don't own the associated IP, mainly copyright. And even if you disagree with that premise, if you trust that they can keep the code secret, it's basically free money.

At any rate, I'm not sure it matters whose codebase it is. I'd even say that a shitty codebase might make for a better test.

The point I'm making is that companies who are serious enough to want to keep their code-base in-house and off the various online repo services are also the kind of companies who are strict about what you can and cannot do with LLMs (if they permit use of LLMs at all).

So it does not make sense that the same companies would then magically sign-off on allowing their entire codebase to be spoon-fed into a whole bunch of LLMs for benchmarking.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com