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

GitHub Copilot is generally available

github.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 796 posts

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#101

Post by password4321 »

dannytatom wrote: post #54

I've enjoyed using it for free, but not sure it's worth the $10/mo yet. When it works great, it's a nice-to-have for speeding up development but has yet to give me anything I wouldn't be able to just write myself. And when I wish it would give me the answer to something I don't know how to do, it spits out something very wrong. Also feels kind of icky to train on open source projects and then charge for the output.

> train on open source projects

To be specific, the FAQ states: "It has been trained on natural language text and source code from publicly available sources, including code in public repositories on GitHub."

Some have raised concerns that Copilot violates at least the spirit of many open source licenses, laundering otherwise unusable code by sprinkling magic AI dust... most likely leaving the Copilot user responsible for copyright infringement.

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#103

Post by tmalsburg2 »

dannytatom wrote: post #54

I've enjoyed using it for free, but not sure it's worth the $10/mo yet. When it works great, it's a nice-to-have for speeding up development but has yet to give me anything I wouldn't be able to just write myself. And when I wish it would give me the answer to something I don't know how to do, it spits out something very wrong. Also feels kind of icky to train on open source projects and then charge for the output.

How can it help you to speed up development but not be worth 10$/month. Your hourly rate can’t be that low.

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#104

Post by treesprite82 »

lucideer wrote: post #61
injidup wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the FAQ """ We built a filter to help detect and suppress the rare instances where a GitHub Copilot suggestion contains code that matches public code on GitHub. You have the choice to turn that filter on or off during setup. With the filter on, GitHub Copilot checks code suggestions with its surrounding code for matches or near matches (ignoring whitespace) against public code on GitHub of about 150 characters.…

> the rare instances That's a bold statement considering how easy it was for testers to quickly find examples of this in initial testing. > against public code on GitHub ... and how some of those examples found were from code not hosted on Github. Ultimately though, what matters here is not whether this is true but whether it's plausible enough for legal departments in companies buy it.

Do you recall/have a link to such examples? Would be interesting to try them again with the filter.

The example I can remember was Carmack's* quick square root - but I'd probably call that "folk code" given it was passed down/altered before being misattributed to the Quake dev, and appears in hundreds of Github repos (many with permissive licenses like WTFPL, so a well-intentioned human may do the same).

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#105

Post by [deleted] »

ahnick wrote: post #3

What's the criteria for being considered "a maintainer of a popular open source project"? They never actually publish the criteria anywhere from what I can tell. They just say visit the subscription page and if you are eligible it should be available to you and if you see a charge then you are not eligible. I think though they should still be transparent about what their metric is for determining popular projects on…

[deleted]

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#106

Post by netr0ute »

gabagool wrote: post #73
netr0ute wrote: post #4

I can't tell if I can get it for free or not other than that vague statement about subscriptions.

> We’re making GitHub Copilot, an AI pair programmer that suggests code in your editor, generally available to all developers for $10 USD/month or $100 USD/year. It will also be free to use for verified students and maintainers of popular open source projects. > Do you want to start using GitHub Copilot today? Get started with a 60-day free trial, and check out our pricing plans. It’s free to use for verified student…

I have an open source project. Do I qualify or not other than guessing at what appears on the billing screen

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#107

Post by theplumber »

bladegash wrote: post #29
anon2020dot00 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My sincere question is what if a developer looks at some GPL code, and then that developer encounters a situation in a corporate project where-in he uses the GPL code from memory, is that already a violation? So to avoid a violation a developer needs to perform a mind-wipe?

I’d be even more curious (more philosophically than anything) as to who is liable for the mishap if Copilot suggests something that ends up violating a license. Is it the developer? The developer’s company? GitHub? Maybe the “AI” is the ultimate scapegoat (“we can’t be liable for what our helpful robot decides to do”)!

It's the developer. Just because you copy/paste something you find on SO or Google or Githib doesn't absolve you of copyright infridgements

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#108

Post by tannhaeuser »

nimbius wrote: post #46
lelandfe wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Previously discussed at length here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27773157 > or assure the developer, that the inserted/suggested code is not a verbatim copy of existing code No, it does not do that. > How can developers be sure, that they are not violating licenses by using Copilot There are no clear answers.

from Microsofts standpoint the shot across the bow for open source licenses is clear: do you have enough lawyers and experts to convince a gerontocracy of the legislative branch of the US government that its not "okay because its AI" because if you dont, then thanks for the code nerd.

Idk if MS is on the safe here. There's a straightforward legal theory for suing, and also parties such as EFF and others with a war chest and the determination to clarify this. Does MS provide indemnification to Copilot customers/users if those are sued by others? My advice would be to stay clear of Copilot.

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#109

Post by andrewmcwatters »

ahnick wrote: post #3

What's the criteria for being considered "a maintainer of a popular open source project"? They never actually publish the criteria anywhere from what I can tell. They just say visit the subscription page and if you are eligible it should be available to you and if you see a charge then you are not eligible. I think though they should still be transparent about what their metric is for determining popular projects on…

A sample of the first 25k repositories and their stargazers on GitHub shows that the top 1% have over 600 stars, and the top 0.1% have nearly 5,000 stars. That's a very small sample, however.

[1]: https://github.com/andrewmcwattersandco/github-statistics

[2]: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HBSwxr0jkUoMulQxyVTC...

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#110

Post by candiddevmike »

bluelightning2k wrote: post #100

My unpopular take: most comments here are super entitled. To paraphrase: "sure it's minblowing and the biggest productivity gain in years, but I want it FREE". Yes. You got used to it being free. And now it's not. But $10/mo is a steal. It's more than fair and far, far less than they could get. And no. They don't owe you anything. In fact, they probably host your code (often free), and less directly provide your IDE…

That money isn't going to the folks who wrote the code to begin with though. I think that's where "it should be free" has merit, GitHub is making money on the backs of others.
Post reply on HN