Live data from Hacker News

I do not agree with Github's use of copyrighted code as training for Copilot

thelig.ht

331–340 of 545 posts

Re: I do not agree with Github's use of copyrighted code as training for Copilot

#331
post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you editing your comments out after they're been replied to? That's really poor form.

I did not edit my comments above after reading your replies, why do you ask? What do you think I changed that affected how the thread reads? And, who says improving or clarifying a comment is poor form? What is the edit button for, and why is it available once replies have been posted?

> What do you think I changed

I think you added

> Which “it” are you referring to?...

Because I have a tab open and can see the old one!

Re: I do not agree with Github's use of copyrighted code as training for Copilot

#332
There’s a lot of consternation over copyright issues, but I see an entirely different problem. When I hear this tool described and see it’s examples the first thing I think is that Github has just automated the dubious process of copy/pasting from StackOverflow.

As a senior developer, I am strongly biased against the SO+c/p programming approach that I’ve seen many Junior and mid level developers use. There’s certainly a time and place for it when you become really stuck but at least having to go out and find the code yourself requires thought which helps you grow.

My gut reaction to Copilot is that adding this automation into IDEs is going to have a net-negative effect on growing developers as it lowers the level of thought and effort necessary to write even trivial applications. This is a huge detriment to learning. You don’t even get the chance to try to solve the problems yourself because the AI is going to be proactively getting in the way of your learning.

All that being said, I think a tool like this could be of great use with boilerplate within a project — but only suggesting things from that project. For example, setting up a new api route, dependency injection, error propagation, etc. Help with all of these mechanical things would be awesome.

Re: I do not agree with Github's use of copyrighted code as training for Copilot

#334
post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did not edit my comments above after reading your replies, why do you ask? What do you think I changed that affected how the thread reads? And, who says improving or clarifying a comment is poor form? What is the edit button for, and why is it available once replies have been posted?

> What do you think I changed I think you added > Which “it” are you referring to?... Because I have a tab open and can see the old one!

I added that before I saw your comment. So?

Re: I do not agree with Github's use of copyrighted code as training for Copilot

#335
post #127

I've given thousands of hours to open source projects, I really think open source is a pillar of modern society. So you would think I am all for something like copilot, but no. At first I thought this was a great feature, because easier access to code, but after some reflection, I am also very skeptical. I am able to make my code open source, because I can make a living out of it, and I have a lot of open source code…

> I am able to make my code open source, because I can make a living out of it, and I have a lot of open source code that I love to share for things like education or private stuff, but if you want to use it for something real, you need to hire me. If you can suck all the code without even I noticing it, that's not fair. If you license your software such that I can do whatever I want with it, then I can do whatever I…

Personally, I make a distinction between legal and socially acceptable.

If one of the richest corporations on Earth can't be bothered to share patches for permissively licensed code that they use, I will gladly shame them.

It's a different story for a small shop with no legal department and wariness about being sued over its use of open source code.

Re: I do not agree with Github's use of copyrighted code as training for Copilot

#336
post #295

I'm glad that Copilot is bringing the grey areas of copyright into discussion. If I write a book and it is copyright, what's the smallest unit which is covered by that copyright? Each word is obviously not. Some sentences will be fairly generic and I will not be the first person to write them. But some sentences will be characteristic of the work or my own style. Clearly how we apply copyright to subdivisions of an o…

This. You realize it doesn’t make any sense. All ideas are shared creations, by definition. If you’ve created something that has meaning for other people, the meaning comes from the ideas you are incorporating into your own tree. There is no defending copyright. It is indefensible from first principles. It makes no logical sense. Though it sure has proven to be a profitable con.

Nonsense. Above a certain level of creativity people do produce novel or exceptional things that are worthy of protection.

Because naked men are a shared concept Michelangelo's David is not protect-worthy?

I'm very worried that such opinions are up-voted so highly when Microsoft leeches open source code (but not its own ...).

People have no respect for other people's creations. Perhaps it makes them feel better because they haven't created anything difficult themselves.

Re: I do not agree with Github's use of copyrighted code as training for Copilot

#338
post #127

I've given thousands of hours to open source projects, I really think open source is a pillar of modern society. So you would think I am all for something like copilot, but no. At first I thought this was a great feature, because easier access to code, but after some reflection, I am also very skeptical. I am able to make my code open source, because I can make a living out of it, and I have a lot of open source code…

> but if you want to use it for something real, you need to hire me. No I do not. Even strictly proprietary code can be copied and used in a for-profit way without approval as long as it qualifies for fair use.

"Something real" and "fair use" don't get along. I'm also not sure fair use trumps licensing, since one is a copyright issue, and the other is the terms of use. You don't get to copy a snippet of GPL code and get away by calling it fair use. At least, I hope it isn't the case.

Re: I do not agree with Github's use of copyrighted code as training for Copilot

#339
post #155

Feels like everyone is missing the point: Copilot will ultimately serve to weaken the arguments in support of software patents and copyright. That can only be a good thing for society (though perhaps not for rent seekers).

It is certainly fascinating to see people start running away from " information wants to be free " and other Free Software principles full tilt when, all of a sudden, it's their livelihoods that are on the line. Unless my recollection is off, the GPL was never the goal of the original Free Software movement; it was merely a tool to get to the end state where all code becomes available for use by anyone for any reason…

> it was merely a tool to get to the end state where all code becomes available for use by anyone for any reason without cost or restriction

Your recollection seems to be completely off. That wasn't the goal of the Free Software movement.

Also, the code they champion comes with restrictions and, optionally, cost. So again, you're off.

Re: I do not agree with Github's use of copyrighted code as training for Copilot

#340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Github is just the begining, they will crawl any open source code, crawling npm, pypi, cpan, public gitlab... If your code is open source, they will get it. That's kinda the point of open source.

I’d argue that this new use case is very interesting to open source and how it relates to the various licenses, and not necessarily “the point of open source”. I can imagine people being OK with their code being used as-is, and/or being modified, but not used completely out of context to train some corporate AI to inject code into commercial code based.

Agreed. I am considering relicensing all of my permissively licensed code because of this. The fundamental assumptions I had when releasing that code under a permissive license have been violated.
Post reply on HN