Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GitHub Copilot

copilot.github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

891–900 of 1001 posts

Re: GitHub Copilot

#891

Post by ktzar »

GuB-42 wrote: post #796
croes wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And still Windows is a mess.

Windows is a mess and I hope it will stay that way. The real strength of Windows is backwards compatibility, especially dealing with proprietary software. Its messiness is a relic of the way things were done in the past, it is also the reason why my 20+ year old binary still runs. And it does without containers or full VMs. I much prefer developing on Linux (I still miss the Visual Studio debugger), but different pla…

Your 20 year old statically compiled binary still works on Linux, probably.

Re: GitHub Copilot

#892

Post by tlamponi »

natfriedman wrote: post #345
stefanos82 wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of questions: - the generated code by AI belongs to me or GitHub? - under what license the generated code falls under? - if generated code becomes the reason for infringment, who gets the blame or legal action? - how can anyone prove the code was actually generated by Copilot and not the project owner? - if a project member does not agree with the usage of Copilot, what should we do as a team? - can Copilot copy…

In general: (1) training ML systems on public data is fair use (2) the output belongs to the operator, just like with a compiler. On the training question specifically, you can find OpenAI's position, as submitted to the USPTO here: https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/OpenAI_R... We expect that IP and AI will be an interesting policy discussion around the world in the coming years, and we're eager to…

> the output belongs to the operator, just like with a compiler.

No it really is not that easy, as with compilers it depends on who owned the source and which license(s) they applied on it.

Or would you say I can compile the Linux kernel and the output belongs to me, as compiler operator, and I can do whatever I want with it without worrying about the GPL at all?

Re: GitHub Copilot

#893

Post by eCa »

anthropodie wrote: post #335
asdfman123 wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pack it all up, boys, programming's over. Hello, AI. Anyone want to hire me to teach your grandma how to use the internet?

Few days back, Sam Altman tweeted this "Prediction: AI will cause the price of work that can happen in front of a computer to decrease much faster than the price of work that happens in the physical world. This is the opposite of what most people (including me) expected, and will have strange effects" And I was like yeah I gotta start preparing for next decade.

So either his prediction or expectation will be correct.

I think I’ll side with his expectation, but then again, my salary depends on it.

Re: GitHub Copilot

#894

Post by lnjarroyo »

brundolf wrote: post #535

For a long time now I've thought that AI would have a really interesting role to play in developer experience, though this isn't really the form I think it should take. I think it would make the most sense as a really advanced static-analysis tool/linter/etc. Imagine writing something like C where whole classes of errors can't be checked statically in a mechanical way, but they could be found by a fuzzy ML system aut…

You are looking for Haskell.

Re: GitHub Copilot

#895

Post by kevingadd »

croes wrote: post #359
blueblisters wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With VSCode, Github and a perhaps a little bit of help from OpenAI, Microsoft is poised to dominate the developer productivity tools market in the near future. I wouldn't be surprised to see really good static analysis and automated code review tools coming out of these teams very soon.

And still Windows is a mess.

IMO a lot of what Windows does isn't something you can apply Copilot-style tech to. The only thing you could train it on would be Windows, really.

Re: GitHub Copilot

#896

Post by skor »

natfriedman wrote: post #143
jonas_kgomo wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is obviously controversial, since we are thinking about how this could displace a large portion of developers. How do you see Copilot being more augmentative than disruptive to the developer ecosystem? Also, how you see it different from regular code completion tools like tabnine.

We think that software development is entering its third wave of productivity change. The first was the creation of tools like compilers, debuggers, garbage collectors, and languages that made developers more productive. The second was open source where a global community of developers came together to build on each other's work. The third revolution will be the use of AI in coding. The problems we spend our days sol…

If this is the drive behind this project, seems like you are putting too many eggs in one basket. Maybe a good attempt to get rid of the "glue" programming but, I wouldn't pay for this. Its all trivial stuff that I now need to review.

It would be a "cool tool" if it inspected the code statically and dynamically. Testing the code to see if it actually does what the AI thinks it should do. From running small bits of code on unit level to integration and acceptance testing. Suggest corrections or receive them. _That_ will save time and I and companies will pay for.

Also you cannot call this the "third revolution" if it is a paid service.

Re: GitHub Copilot

#898

Post by bobm_kite9 »

Is there any explanation of how this works, beyond ‘ai’?

I mean, I understand (I think) how Bert/gpt works, but I can’t quite see how you would train this.

Re: GitHub Copilot

#900

Post by azinman2 »

dannyw wrote: post #860
noway421 wrote: post #843

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Email is a just such a communication medium. It requires both prose at length, and also quick response. Even though the type of information passed around is usually binary: OK/NOT OK, or a status update. Gmail offers a way to reduce the "prose at length" to a few buttons. And it adds the pleasantries for you. You can think of it as a workflow automation tool. Your email chains are tickets and you're moving them throu…

Absolutely. While there's benefits and drawbacks to every technology, auto-complete in Gmail saves me so much time. If I'm sending to a relative or family member for example, or even a professional contact, then I'm not going to be lazy and auto-complete. But when someone says "Does that sound good to you?" it's great to push a button that replies "Sounds great, thank you!" Maybe I would have naturally written "That…

> Maybe I would have naturally written "That sounds great, thank you [name]", but what's the difference?

Social graces?

Post reply on HN