Show HN: TabNine, an autocompleter for all languages

Post by itdaniher » Tue, Nov 06, 2018, 7:46 PM UTC

asdkhadsj wrote: post #22

jacob-jackson wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your concerns are understandable. It is about as risky as installing an editor plugin which updates automatically. The private keys used to sign releases are kept offline and would not be available to an attacker even if they compromised my online accounts. Finally, TabNine will work correctly if you deny it network access (say, by blacklisting update.tabnine.com).

Wait, is the auto-update all that's needed for network? I assumed it was license validation or something. If it's just updating, couldn't you provide a different method of updating like manual update checking, and then peoples concerns would be solved?

Post by gnicholas » Tue, Nov 06, 2018, 7:47 PM UTC

imh wrote: post #30

I wish someone would figure out the right UX for partial autocompletion. e.g. I type "wo" and my phone suggests ("would", "work", "wonder"), there should be an easy way to say I'm trying to type "working" rather than clicking the "work" autocomplete then backspace, then "ing". I'd imaging TabNine has this problem in spades, since it does such long autocompletes. It could suggest "unsigned long long" when I've typed "…

Post by stevew20 » Tue, Nov 06, 2018, 7:48 PM UTC

itdaniher wrote: post #28

jacob-jackson wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your concerns are understandable. It is about as risky as installing an editor plugin which updates automatically. The private keys used to sign releases are kept offline and would not be available to an attacker even if they compromised my online accounts. Finally, TabNine will work correctly if you deny it network access (say, by blacklisting update.tabnine.com).

...as risky as installing a proprietary editor plugin which updates automatically, yes. Also, AFAIK most understandings of MIT, BSD, and Apache 2.0 licenses require you to acknowledge the copyright holders of the source code you compile into your binary, even if the licenses permit binary distribution. I can't find your "Copyright (c) 2018 Tokio Contributors" or "Copyright (c) 2014 The Rust Project Developers" that I…

Post by smortaz » Tue, Nov 06, 2018, 8:08 PM UTC

Post by gbear605 » Tue, Nov 06, 2018, 8:15 PM UTC

achamayou wrote: post #44

itdaniher wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think a DRM solution that is both robust against an adversary and inspectable by a stakeholder can be engineered. Software can't look out for both the person running it and the person selling it simultaneously when their needs are mutually exclusive. Cory Doctorow has some eloquent content on the topic, ie at [0]. In this particular case, the use of TLS (good!) makes it relatively challenging to inspect. Assu…

If the amount of traffic is predictably small though, you can be confident that it’s not uploading the entirety of your source code, so perhaps some mechanism to estqblish that would help?