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

371–380 of 796 posts

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#371

Post by omginternets »

lkfsfldkjfslk wrote: post #338
omginternets wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I realize I misinterpreted the OP, but you’ve set me up for a snarky remark so perfectly that I can’t resist. Please forgive me… here goes:

> it produces code that is correct in some circumstances, but is incorrect for the author's use case.

That’s a mighty convoluted way of saying “incorrect code” ;)

Phew! I feel better, now!

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#372

Post by DeathArrow »

paskozdilar wrote: post #345
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…

Can Copilot write tests? That way it could test its own code and tweak it until it works. Of course, one would then ask how to verify tests. I suppose Copilot could write meta-tests - tests that verify other tests. That way it could test its own tests and tweak them until they work. Of course, one would then ask how to verify meta-tests. I suppose Copilot could write meta-meta-tests - tests that verify meta-tests. Th…

>Can Copilot write tests? That way it could test its own code and tweak it until it works.

Sure it can. But you can't rely on them being good. You have to read the tests carefully.

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#373

Post by stagas »

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…

I only use it a couple of times a week maybe to autocomplete some tedious repetitive elements, and perhaps when I'm too lazy to find a lib for a very well known function, like converting Celsius to Fahrenheit. Those it does well and it works. But 10$ a month is too much, I'd sign up for a usage-based plan, if there was one, so that I can pay only for the times I use it. But not for a fixed subscription where it sits most of the time.

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#374

Post by qorrect »

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…

Completely agree, $10 a month is a steal.

I have loved using it, I've had several moments where I had to stop typing to lookup a formula for something, and a few seconds later it provides the correct formula. Gives me those warm fuzzy feelings emacs used to give me.

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#375

Post by lampe3 »

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…

For me learning vim or at least all the vim code editing features was a bigger boost in productivity then using copilot.

I use the vim extension for vscode which is great.

In general learning the tools we already have I would say has for now a greater impact on productivity then Copilot.

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#377

Post by [deleted] »

johnfn wrote: post #190
candiddevmike wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What? Should I have to reimburse the author of every tutorial and Stack Overflow post I read on my journey to becoming a software engineer?

[deleted]

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#378

Post by omginternets »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #365
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 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.

More so than, say, classical snippets, auto-complete, and speech-to-text?

And pray tell, how much typing is required to go back and fix the incorrect code produced by copilot?

P.S.: wishing you a speedy recovery!

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#379

Post by quickthrower2 »

nikeee wrote: post #193

The main page [0] shows you awesome demos, but also its weaknesses in the very first example. It doesn't encode the url encoded body properly: > body: `text=${text}`, So it breaks if the text contains a '&' and even allows parameter injection to the call of the 3rd party service. Isn't that critical on a sentiment analysis API, but could result in actual security holes. I hope the users won't blindly use the generate…

Yep. Copilot is going to be good for “pick up the pieces” devs

Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available

#380

Post by visarga »

marshray wrote: post #370
visarga wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

You can work on the definition of "similar code". It can be a separate model on its own. Use human judgements to learn it.
Post reply on HN