Like, if I'm doing something for myself, that's exactly the place where I wanna do something amazing,

That's always my intention with my personal projects too! But that always results in "Wow I just learned how to do this thing much better, let me refactor the whole project to do it perfectly everywhere" followed by my Adderall running out. So there's just so many half-done refactors I either forget about or abandon because I get a new idea the next day, but that's totally just a skill issue.

You're right though, the code I write at work is much worse, but my Company hosts their own GitLab instance so the code we write can't even be used to poison Copilot :(

I would love my personal projects to be of the highest quality but unfortunately i need to pay bills so i have to prioritize my work projects that get me paid

Maybe they meant abandoned projects that never quite got through the todo list but you're right. Even my abandoned projects are generally better than the legacy I've seen lol

This brings up an interesting question with AI

If I, as a human, read a piece of Open source code it solves a problem in a unique and new way, and then I myself write my own closed source code that solves the problem in the same way, I have not violated a license. The license is for the code itself, not a patent for the specific way the code solves the problem. And since the code in the closed source product is written by me and not copy pasted from the open source project, I have not violated the license per

So what about AI? If you train the AI on a piece of code, and it outputs the same or similar code, do we treat that as if the human copy pasted the code? Or do we treat it as if the human used what they learned from the first program and wrote something similar?

There is already an AI company taking advantage of this. They advertise that that if you want to use open source code in a closed source product, you hire them-- their AI will parse through the open source code and spit out a list of specifications that is specifically not code. Another AI on a completely different system that has never had access to the open source code will then take that specification and spit out program code that is functionally identical and does the exact same thing but is a completely new creation. The result is that you essentially rewrite the open source code but without the copyleft restrictions.

This is going to be an issue that laws and courts will have to address. Especially if, in your example, the code produced by the AI was actually identical to the GPL quake code. Because while a human copying the functionality is never going to write the exact same code line by line, the machine might be.