111–120 of 585 posts
Does Github give users a toggle to opt-out of being in the copilot training dataset? I feel like that would be a decent compromise for folks not down with their code being used in copilot.
There's this https://github.com/settings/copilot
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> New devs - especially those coming from bootcamps (I say this without judgement) - mostly start with practical skills. I wouldn't say that it's "especially those coming from bootcamps". Those coming from uni are no better IME.
Not sure I'd agree, every CS student at my school had to take a class where one of the projects was implementing a mini version of git from scratch. And even before that class there was at least one lecture dedicated to git in the intro class.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> New devs - especially those coming from bootcamps (I say this without judgement) - mostly start with practical skills. I wouldn't say that it's "especially those coming from bootcamps". Those coming from uni are no better IME.
Not sure I'd agree, every CS student at my school had to take a class where one of the projects was implementing a mini version of git from scratch. And even before that class there was at least one lecture dedicated to git in the intro class.
I publish my public FOSS work on a self-hosted Gitea. I don't allow account creation, and people can send me pull requests by email. That said, I think one thing (other than interface and brand loyalty) that keeps FOSS projects on GitHub is network effects. You can reasonably expect to search it and find the projects you're looking for, and your account lets you use the issue tracker and pull requests on other projec…
> people can send me pull requests by email. Great, you already lost half of them.
If you really want to contribute, but don't want and e-mail based flow, send me a mail, and we can discuss.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it's fair to frame this as specific to GitHub, or even as a thing to wring hands over. New devs - especially those coming from bootcamps (I say this without judgement) - mostly start with practical skills. Industry-standard ways to just get things done. That's how you get a job, that's how you get off the ground. This goes beyond source-control; languages/frameworks, tooling, etc. You enter the territor…
> New devs - especially those coming from bootcamps (I say this without judgement) - mostly start with practical skills. I wouldn't say that it's "especially those coming from bootcamps". Those coming from uni are no better IME.
Does Github give users a toggle to opt-out of being in the copilot training dataset? I feel like that would be a decent compromise for folks not down with their code being used in copilot.
I should not have to opt out. GitHub should have to respect my license. I already said they can use my code, as long as they keep an attribution intact (via a BSD license, for example) GitHub is taking my code and ignoring the license. I don’t understand why anyone would think that is ok.
I find the only people making these OSS claims haven't used copilot and tend to lack any real contributions to OSS. What you're describing is just simply not the case for 99.9 percent of the code snippets being produced/generated based on data from GitHub.
I actually care more about putting code into peoples hands versus someone copying a license file, that's probably why I use the unlicense... "Because you have more important things to do than enriching lawyers or imposing petty restrictions on users"
Where does this end? You write a license that your GPL code can only be re-hosted on non-GitHub hosts? git still exists, if I'm unhappy with GitHub I can just add a new origin (sourcehut, gitea, gitlab, self-hosting, etc) and push there. But I'm perfectly happy with GitHub and I'm fine if their ML thingy makes money off my code, I get free actions runners, a nice UI, pull-requests, etc, into the bargain, not bad. Lik…
As an indivdual you can certainly think so. But as a community we must balance how much advantages do we get from GitHub versus how much advantages it gets from us.
Considering that GitHub will probably make millions with copilot, then it is fair to say that a big part of that success comes from the quality of the code we collectively put one. Therefore, money should be shared. And the first thing to do is to ask Microsoft : how much money do you make on us ? And the only possible way to get an honest answer is to make sure the management of GitHub is done jointly by MSFT and the community.
I don't think this is going to happen anytime soon. So I'm seriously considering getting out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
git --> github porn --> pornhub best explanation of github for noobs
That's actually an excellent way of explaining it. Though it's frustrating that it's porn hub specifically, because referencing pornography can be awkward or impractical in workplace contexts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
GitLab is mentioned on the advocacy page https://giveupgithub.org/ . GitLab is an open-core business, which means there is a permissively licensed FOSS version and a proprietary version. The gitlab.com website uses the proprietary version. In addition many features of GitLab don't work at all or work much less well if you turn off JavaScript. They have swayed a lot of ostensibly FOSS, copyleft-leaning and privacy/sec…
> In addition many features of GitLab don't work at all or work much less well if you turn off JavaScript. I feel like the venn diagram of people who complain about JS being required and of people who have never had to code up a web /app/ that users expect rich interactions without a page-reload is just a circle.
If I'm just reading static text on a web page, theres'a absolutely no reason why I should need javascript to just read it.