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

361–370 of 796 posts

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#361

Post by DeathArrow »

I use Copilot for .NET. It's useful to generate bits of code like methods calls by repeating what I've previously done and changing variable names and types. It's a kind of bit smarter Intellisense.

I can't use it to generate longer chunks of code like methods or functions, because it will do it a bit wrong and I loose time to correct it.

It can somehow generate correct and fitting code, but it takes multiple tries and writing comments in which you describe exactly, with lots of details what you want to do. At that point I'm better off writing the code myself.

However, if the method should be small like VerifyIfNumberIsEven, it does a good job.

Probably I would pay 10$ for it.

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#362

Post by danielrhodes »

I haven't used Copilot extensively, only for fun. But I find it interesting that people are questioning the price.

Given that the cost of a software engineer's time is so high, $10/mo. seems very reasonable if Copilot saves you more than that in time per month. So in a vacuum assuming all dollars are spent with equal productivity, if I take the equivalent of $1000/mo. in time writing boilerplate, and I can reduce that to even $989 with Copilot, it becomes a good deal.

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#363

Post by Otek »

fartcannon wrote: post #254

It would be nice if people stopped giving Microsoft all their code to use to then sell back to them. Since this is derived from code Microsoft did not write, or ask permission to use, it should be at the very least free to use.

People can do whatever they want with their code, and give it to whoever they want

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#364

Post by DeathArrow »

jerf wrote: post #226
Hamcha wrote: post #195

I'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…

To me it's no danger, since I read what it generates. If it's wrong I either correct it or write it from scratch.

And I also write tests, which should catch bad logic.

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#365

Post by bryanrasmussen »

omginternets wrote: post #320
jerf wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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…

I wholeheartedly agree with your analysis, but feel like it’s ignoring the elephant in the room: writing code is not the bottleneck in need of optimization. Conceiving the solution is. Any time “saved” through Copilot and it’s ilk is immediately nullified by having to check it’s correctness. From there, the problem is worsened by the Frankensteinesque stitching together of disparate parts that you describe. I can’t i…

>I can’t imagine how Copilot would save anything but a negligible amount of effort for someone who is actually thinking about what they’re writing.

since I have a right arm swelled up to twice normal size right now and it hurts to type for more than ten minutes (hopefully ok in a few days) I can imagine an advanced autocomplete being really useful for some disabilities.

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#366

Post by omginternets »

vosper wrote: post #353
omginternets wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wholeheartedly agree with your analysis, but feel like it’s ignoring the elephant in the room: writing code is not the bottleneck in need of optimization. Conceiving the solution is. Any time “saved” through Copilot and it’s ilk is immediately nullified by having to check it’s correctness. From there, the problem is worsened by the Frankensteinesque stitching together of disparate parts that you describe. I can’t i…

> I wholeheartedly agree with your analysis, but feel like it’s ignoring the elephant in the room: writing code is not the bottleneck in need of optimization. Conceiving the solution is. I dunno about this. I know the received wisdom is that "writing the code isn't the hard part", but I think reality is more like "writing the code is only one of the hard parts". There's an awful lot of badly-written code, or code whi…

Yes, I think you’ve more precisely articulated what I had in mind. The point stands, though: codepilot does not help with the hard part of the job. It solves a problem that only exists for people who aren’t exercising care.

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#367

Post by throwaway675309 »

tmalsburg2 wrote: post #235
tmalsburg2 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The fact that GitHub charge only 10$/month suggests that they themselves don’t believe in their product. Because if it would actually work, i.e. speed up software development by, say, >10%, developers should be happy to pay 10 times as much or more.

This is a rather silly argument... by that logic since using the Adobe suite saves me at least it has a dozen hours every month I would be happy paying $500 a month for it.

There's a limit to what individuals are willing to pay for a subscription service irrespective of how many hours it saves you. Now if we're talking enterprise and bulk licensing then that's a separate issue.

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#369

Post by qorrect »

tmalsburg2 wrote: post #156
greatpatton wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's great when it works, and can also be costly when it doesn't or when you blindly trust it.

Which is just another way of saying that it doesn’t really work, except perhaps for party tricks.

For me it works wonderfully, when you choose to use it. If you are just blindingly accepting every suggestion, you're going to have a bad time.

You also have to (slightly) change your flow to get the most out of it, which I know is a deal breaker for many.

I absolutely love it. It's not going to write good code for you, but for an autocompleter it is amazing.

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#370

Post by marshray »

visarga wrote: post #332
6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Would a cartoon about Mickey Duck and Donald Mouse be infringing?
Post reply on HN