It is just a matter of time before IDE's will have this capability built in for free.
GitHub Copilot is generally available
331–340 of 796 posts
Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available
#332Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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…
It seems unfortunately clear that generative ML as typically practiced falls under fair use of even the most restrictive licenses or lack thereof (e.g. a training set including disney movies without disney’s permission). Some people say that’s great and it’s legal hooray, but I would love it if the law caught up and added requirements to the models trained this way. If you benefit from other people’s stuff without th…
If you can't prove your code was stolen you shouldn't have a claim. And Codex should just skip code that exists in the training set. All that remains is creative code.
Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available
#333I've been using Copilot non-stop on every hobby project I have ever since they've let me in (2021/07/13) and I am honestly flabbergasted they think it's worth 10$/mo. My experience using it till this day is the following: - It's an amazing all-rounder autocomplete for most boilerplate code. Generally anything that someone who's spent 5 minutes reading the code can do, Copilot can do just as well. - It's terrible if y…
"how to put a sentence together describing the rules, it absolutely doesn't actually understand how "Chii" melds work" The more experience I get with GPT-3 type technologies, the more I would never let them near my code. It wasn't an intent of the technology per se, but it has proved to be very good at producing superficially appealing output that can stand up not only to a quick scan, but to a moderately deep readin…
> it has proved to be very good at producing superficially appealing output that can stand up not only to a quick scan, but to a moderately deep reading, but still falls apart on a more careful reading
Huh, that’s my experience with human-written texts and journalism in particular.
Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available
#334I have been using CoPilot for about 5 months. For Python and JavaScript (I am not much of a JavaScript developer - not a primary language for me) I found that it is very worthwhile. It is easy to not accept generated code, or tweak and test generated code.
I recently started a 100% Common Lisp job and it does not work nearly as well for Common Lisp. A lot of generated code is Emacs Lisp.
Two months ago I would have signed up for a payed account with no hesitation, but I need to re-evaluate it with Common Lisp again. BTW, I happily pay OpenAI for GPT-3 APIs instead of using it for free. For NLP work, OpenAI's APIs have high value to me.
Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available
#335This has been the biggest productivity improvement to my workflow in years No it doesn't "understand what I'm doing" or "get everything right" but that's hardly the point It's often reducing the amount of labor I'm doing by hitting the keyboard by guessing 90% correctly what I was going to type It also often saves me from having to google how to do something, it's effectively serving me a search result right along my…
Same here. This has absolutely helped improve the speed at which I code and reduced the cognitive burden significantly.
It's definitely not perfect, but it's worth the price to me and if I can pay and help the product improve, it's a no-brainer.
Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available
#336As the maintainer of some Python libraries, how do I get my part of that $10/month because Github Copilot was trained using my code...
This is the price you pay for getting to use GitHub for free.
Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just to clarify: are you saying you'd pay $20 for an hour saved, but not $33.33 for an hour saved?
I'm saying that at $100 yearly I'm on the fence of maybe yes or no. At $60 yearly I'm auto-yes without having to think in rational terms. I guess I'm just not at that place in life where $100 is the tier in which I think emotionally. Also, if I magically knew that I could save you 3 hours yearly, but it were spread out over the course of a year, and that your savings would occasionally spike down into negative and th…
Sharpe ratio too low
Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available
#338Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I've been using Copilot non-stop > I am honestly flabbergasted they think it's worth 10$/mo These two statments seem contradictory to me. Why are you using it 'non-stop' if it isn't even worth $10/month?
You overlooked an even bigger contradiction! Namely: > The biggest problem I've had is not that it doesn't write correctly, it's that it think it knows how and then produce good looking code at a glance but with wrong logic. I cannot rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that would provoke such a statement. EDIT: upon careful rereading, I think I misunderstood. The intended meaning is likely closer to: the…
My read was that it produces code that is correct in some circumstances, but is incorrect for the author's use case.
Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available
#339Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I've been using Copilot non-stop > I am honestly flabbergasted they think it's worth 10$/mo These two statments seem contradictory to me. Why are you using it 'non-stop' if it isn't even worth $10/month?
You overlooked an even bigger contradiction! Namely: > The biggest problem I've had is not that it doesn't write correctly, it's that it think it knows how and then produce good looking code at a glance but with wrong logic. I cannot rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that would provoke such a statement. EDIT: upon careful rereading, I think I misunderstood. The intended meaning is likely closer to: the…
I won't rightly describe the confusion your post gives me. Nothing he says seems contradictory. It produces good looking code which upon further inspection has faulty logic.
You would expect that from a program that copies a database of all the examples in the world (or whatever) and then just does an autocomplete without any kind of comprehension of what the problem is that is trying to be solved.
No confusion or contradiction at all.
Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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…
It seems unfortunately clear that generative ML as typically practiced falls under fair use of even the most restrictive licenses or lack thereof (e.g. a training set including disney movies without disney’s permission). Some people say that’s great and it’s legal hooray, but I would love it if the law caught up and added requirements to the models trained this way. If you benefit from other people’s stuff without th…
What is actually crazy is having copyright/patents/whatever apply to mathematical structures and code, and be retainable for long, it's rent on ideas, such a ridiculous concept.