141–150 of 796 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The API version of copilot exists. It's called OpenAI Codex. https://openai.com/blog/openai-codex/
Yeah but it takes forever to get off the waitlist (I've been waiting for almost a year)
I've enjoyed using it for free, but not sure it's worth the $10/mo yet. When it works great, it's a nice-to-have for speeding up development but has yet to give me anything I wouldn't be able to just write myself. And when I wish it would give me the answer to something I don't know how to do, it spits out something very wrong. Also feels kind of icky to train on open source projects and then charge for the output.
> train on open source projects To be specific, the FAQ states: "It has been trained on natural language text and source code from publicly available sources, including code in public repositories on GitHub." Some have raised concerns that Copilot violates at least the spirit of many open source licenses, laundering otherwise unusable code by sprinkling magic AI dust... most likely leaving the Copilot user responsibl…
AI is just recomposition of existing snippets of code, art, text, music, etc. Does an AI fall under fair use? What happens when an AI produces something too similar to an existing work or trademark. I know the computer won't get sued, the owner/user will. But still, it's a hard problem.
Even if Copilot was initialized with snippets from Open Source Software (exclusively), it doesn't mean that copyright infringement isn't a concern.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> has yet to give me anything I wouldn't be able to just write myself Sure it has: Time. In terms of economics it's really simple: Does Copilot free up more than 10$ worth of your time per month? If the product works at all as I understand it (I haven't tried), the answer should be a resounding "yes, and then some" for pretty much any SE, given the current market rates. If the answer is no (for example because it pro…
Having used it quite a lot I'm not sure it does save me $10 of time per month. At least as often that it generates usefully correct code it generates correct appearing but actually totally wrong code that I have to carefully check and/or debug. It's quite nice not to have to type generic boilerplate in sometimes I guess but it's very frustrating when it generates junk.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can't wait for someone to integrate this into a shell. Does anyone know if such a project exists?
Probably not exactly what you're looking for, but Warp (a new terminal client) has "AI Code Search" built in that's powered by GPT-3. Quite useful for someone like me who tends to avoid the terminal when I can. https://www.warp.dev https://docs.warp.dev/features/ai-command-search
https://www.warp.dev/blog/replace-git-cheat-sheet-ai-command...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Also feels kind of icky to train on open source projects and then charge for the output. "open source is great, except when it's used in a way I don't like"
I don't see the use itself as a problem, but rather that the result is not treated as a derivative work of the input. If I train it on GPL code, the result should be GPL, too.
Also - there is logic in copilot that checks to make sure it is not suggesting exact duplicates of code from its training set, and if it does, it never sends them to the user.
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 responsibl…
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 responsibl…
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.
I'll be honest I love the technology involved in this product but I hate that it's another aspect of monetizing the efforts and humanity of millions of people. It's incredible that we're able to do these things but awful at the same time since this data was / is not theirs. Same as something like Dall-E.
...and not compensating (or even attributing as required by the licenses) the authors for it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Also feels kind of icky to train on open source projects and then charge for the output. "open source is great, except when it's used in a way I don't like"
I don't see the use itself as a problem, but rather that the result is not treated as a derivative work of the input. If I train it on GPL code, the result should be GPL, too.