191–200 of 446 posts
It say on the github page that "GitHub Copilot will attempt to match your code's context and style. You can edit the suggested code as you choose.". Does this mean that the plugin will transmit my code to github servers?
A lot of the examples people are giving of code Copilot filled in for them sound like what would be called plagiarism, and probably also copyright infringement. Which I think was fairly predictable. What wasn't predictable was that someone would ship this Copilot anyway, consequently exposing their company and their users' companies to liability. Imagine if you hired an intern who was copy&pasting bits of GPL'd code…
Letting your intern blindly commit to your code base seems like the bigger issue here. The entire purpose of an internship is to learn and to be guided by professionals, not to be treated as a cheap laborer. You don't hire interns, you train interns.
Have you used copilot or are you speculating?
Still no way to opt your code out of this. Disgusting.
A friend of a friend, told me he is furiously adding code to Github, with subtle security bugs. He can't wait for it to show up in the proper places...Courtesy of Copilot ;-)
https://arxiv.org/abs/2007.02220
Although our own work shows Copilot is pretty good at adding security flaws on its own:
The plebs should also play a little divide and conquer now and then.
A lot of the examples people are giving of code Copilot filled in for them sound like what would be called plagiarism, and probably also copyright infringement. Which I think was fairly predictable. What wasn't predictable was that someone would ship this Copilot anyway, consequently exposing their company and their users' companies to liability. Imagine if you hired an intern who was copy&pasting bits of GPL'd code…
Wait til stackoverflow sues everyone into oblivion! Letting your intern blindly commit to your code base seems like the bigger issue here. The entire purpose of an internship is to learn and to be guided by professionals, not to be treated as a cheap laborer. You don't hire interns, you train interns. Have you used copilot or are you speculating?
(And people couldn't tell in code reviews, nor on other occasions to see the code, since it's not normal to recognize GPL'd code on sight; everyone just assumed the developer was productive.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not against "copying" code. I just looked up "python build url query" The first link describes the `urllib.parse. urlencode` function which takes a dict. So I would build the query like so: from urllib.parse import urlencode urlencode({ "action": "query", "format": "json", ... "gscoord": f"{str(latitude.value)}|{str(longitude.value)}", }) I think this is orders of magnitude clearer code. But that's a parameter th…
This. Code should be optimized for reading, I think this kind of code is OK for exploratory stuff, but needs to be rewritten later.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Redis has the INCR command that does this in redis without the additional round-trips (and race conditions). It also sets the value to 0 if the key doesn't exist. So, I actually consider this to be exactly the bad behavior that people accuse Copilot of.
Yes it's not very shinning there. I would also throw the error instead of printing the error to the console and returning undefined.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nope. Copilot users are inserting "ticking time-bombs" into their own codebases. The buck stops with the user, when they use code from any source at all , whether it's their head, the internet, some internal library, lecture notes, a coworker, a random dude of the street, or who knows what else, it their own responsibility to ensure the code they're using has been released under a license they can use. They don't get…
We agree that downstream users who redistribute copyrighted code regurgitated by Copilot are in violation of copyright. It doesn't seem to me as though the distinction between "Copilot reproduced the code and the engineer copy/pasted/saved it" versus "Copilot inserted the code" is crucial. There's a separate question about Microsoft's own liability. When Copilot reproduces open source code without adhering to the ter…
Yes, the only thing that matters is who authorized the code to be published, which is never Copilot (an automated system that takes tickets, has copilot craft patches from them, then publishes them with no human review would be a) very cool and b) an incomprehensibly terrible idea; but even then there is still a human authorizing the code to be published, just residing a level of abstraction removed from the process itself)