Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 806 posts

Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code

#111

Post by shadowgovt »

ianbutler wrote: post #85

I just tested it myself on a random c file I created in the middle of a rust project I'm working on, it reproduced his full code verbatim from just the function header so clearly it does regurgitate proprietary code unlike some people have said, I do not have his source so co-pilot isn't just using existing context. I've been finding co-pilot really useful but I'll be pausing it for now, and I'm glad I have only been…

Searching for the function names in his libraries, I'm seeing some 32,000 hits.

I suspect he has a different problem which (thanks to Microsoft) is now a problem he has to care about: his code probably shows up in one or more repos copy-pasted with improper LGPL attribution. There'd be no way for Copilot to know that had happened, and it would have mixed in the code.

(As a side note: understanding why an ML engine outputs a particular result is still an open area of research AFAIK.)

Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code

#112

Post by codefreakxff »

c7b wrote: post #99
tpxl wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Joe Rando plays a song from 1640 on a violin he gets a copyright claim on Youtube. When Jane Rando uses devtools to check a website source code she gets sued. When Microsoft steals all code on their platform and sells it, they get lauded. When "Open" AI steals thousands of copyrighted images and sells them, they get lauded. I am skeptical of imaginary property myself, but fuck this one set of rules for the poor,…

> When Joe Rando plays a song from 1640 on a violin he gets a copyright claim on Youtube. When Jane Rando uses devtools to check a website source code she gets sued. Do you have any evidence for those claims, or anything resembling those examples? Music copyright has long expired for classical music, and big shots are definitely not exempt from where it applies. Just look at how much heat Ed Sheeran, one of the bigge…

There have been a number of stories about musicians being copyright claims. Here is the first result on Google

https://www.radioclash.com/archives/2021/05/02/youtuber-gets...

For being sued for looking at source here is the first result on Google

https://www.wired.com/story/missouri-threatens-sue-reporter-...

Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code

#113

Post by cmdialog »

ghoward wrote: post #27
acoustics wrote: post #6

I’ve noticed that people tend to disapprove of AI trained on their profession’s data, but are usually indifferent or positive about other applications of AI. For example, I know artists who are vehemently against DALL-E, Stable Diffusion, etc. and regard it as stealing, but they view Copilot and GPT-3 as merely useful tools. I also know software devs who are extremely excited about AI art and GPT-3 but are outraged b…

I am a programmer who has written extensively on my blog and HN against Copilot. I am also not a hypocrite; I do not like DALL-E or Stable Diffusion either. As a sibling comment implies, these AI tools give more power to people who control data, i.e., big companies or wealthy people, while at the same time, they take power away from individuals. Copilot is bad for society. DALL-E and Stable Diffusion are bad for soci…

Obviously this is a matter of philosophy. I am using Copilot as an assistant, and for that it works out very nicely. It's fancy code completion. I don't know who is trying to use this to write non-trivial code but that's as bad an idea as trying to pass off writing AI "prompts" as a type of engineering.

These things are tools to make more involved things. You're not going to be remembered for all the AI art you prompted into existence, no matter how many "good ones" you manage to generate. No one is going to put you into the Guggenheim for it.

Likewise, programmers aren't going to become more depraved or something by using Copilot. I think that kind of prescriptive purism needs to Go Away Forever, personally.

Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code

#114

Post by [deleted] »

CapsAdmin wrote: post #107

I would imagine the root problem here is people taking copyrighted code, pasting it in their project and disregarding the license. To me this seems common, especially when it comes to toy, test and hobby projects. I don't see how copilot or similar tools can solve this problem without vetting each project.

[deleted]

Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code

#115

Post by eyelidlessness »

jonnycomputer wrote: post #5

Microsoft should just train it on all their proprietary code instead. See how sanguine they are about it then.

As a thought experiment: what do we all suppose would be the impact to Microsoft if they deliberately made public the proprietary source code for all of their publicly available commercial products and efforts (including licensed software, services; excluding private contracts, research), but the rest of their intellectual property and trade secrets remained private?

Since I’m posing the question, here’s my guess:

- Their stock would take at least a short term hit because it’s an unconventional and uncharacteristic move

- The code would reveal more about their strategic interests to competitors than they’d like, but probably nothing revelatory

- It might confirm or reinforce some negative perceptions of their business practices

- It might dispel some too

- It may reduce some competitive advantage amongst enormous businesses, and may elevate some very large firms to potential competitors

- It would provide little to no new advantage to smaller players who aren’t already in reach of competing with them and/or don’t have the resources to capitalize on access to the code

- It would probably significantly improve public perception of the company and its future intentions, at least among developers and the broader tech community

In other words, a wash. Overall business impact would be roughly neutral. The code has more strategic than technical value, there are few who could leverage the technical value that is any kind of revenue center with growth potential. Any disadvantage would be negated by the public image goodwill it generated.

Maybe my take is naive though! Maybe it would really hurt Microsoft long term if suddenly everyone can fork Windows 11, or steal ideas for their idiosyncratic office suite, or get really clever about how to get funded to go head to head with Azure armed with code everyone else can access too.

Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code

#116

Post by psychphysic »

bayindirh wrote: post #78
acoustics wrote: post #6

I’ve noticed that people tend to disapprove of AI trained on their profession’s data, but are usually indifferent or positive about other applications of AI. For example, I know artists who are vehemently against DALL-E, Stable Diffusion, etc. and regard it as stealing, but they view Copilot and GPT-3 as merely useful tools. I also know software devs who are extremely excited about AI art and GPT-3 but are outraged b…

I, with my software developer hat, am not excited by AI. Not a bit, honestly. Esp. about these big models trained on huge amount of data, without any consent. Let me be perfectly clear. I'm all for the tech. The capabilities are nice. The thing I'm strongly against is training these models on any data without any consent. GPT-3 is OK, training it with public stuff regardless of its license is not. Copilot is OK, trai…

I disagree.

Those are effectively cases of cryptomnesia[0]. Part and parcel of learning.

If you don't want broad access your work, don't upload it to a public repository. It's very simple. Good on you for recognising that you don't agree with what GitHub looks at data in public repos, but it's not their problem.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptomnesia

Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code

#117

Post by cyanydeez »

tpxl wrote: post #16
acoustics wrote: post #6

I’ve noticed that people tend to disapprove of AI trained on their profession’s data, but are usually indifferent or positive about other applications of AI. For example, I know artists who are vehemently against DALL-E, Stable Diffusion, etc. and regard it as stealing, but they view Copilot and GPT-3 as merely useful tools. I also know software devs who are extremely excited about AI art and GPT-3 but are outraged b…

When Joe Rando plays a song from 1640 on a violin he gets a copyright claim on Youtube. When Jane Rando uses devtools to check a website source code she gets sued. When Microsoft steals all code on their platform and sells it, they get lauded. When "Open" AI steals thousands of copyrighted images and sells them, they get lauded. I am skeptical of imaginary property myself, but fuck this one set of rules for the poor,…

Basically, copyright is for people with copyright lawyers

Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code

#118

Post by heavyset_go »

acoustics wrote: post #6

I’ve noticed that people tend to disapprove of AI trained on their profession’s data, but are usually indifferent or positive about other applications of AI. For example, I know artists who are vehemently against DALL-E, Stable Diffusion, etc. and regard it as stealing, but they view Copilot and GPT-3 as merely useful tools. I also know software devs who are extremely excited about AI art and GPT-3 but are outraged b…

Your post is a good example of the tu quoque fallacy[1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque

Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code

#119

Post by tablespoon »

acoustics wrote: post #6

I’ve noticed that people tend to disapprove of AI trained on their profession’s data, but are usually indifferent or positive about other applications of AI. For example, I know artists who are vehemently against DALL-E, Stable Diffusion, etc. and regard it as stealing, but they view Copilot and GPT-3 as merely useful tools. I also know software devs who are extremely excited about AI art and GPT-3 but are outraged b…

> I’ve noticed that people tend to disapprove of AI trained on their profession’s data, but are usually indifferent or positive about other applications of AI.

In other words: the banal observation that people care far more when their stuff is stolen than when some stranger has their stuff stolen.

Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code

#120

Post by bcrosby95 »

acoustics wrote: post #6

I’ve noticed that people tend to disapprove of AI trained on their profession’s data, but are usually indifferent or positive about other applications of AI. For example, I know artists who are vehemently against DALL-E, Stable Diffusion, etc. and regard it as stealing, but they view Copilot and GPT-3 as merely useful tools. I also know software devs who are extremely excited about AI art and GPT-3 but are outraged b…

I look at IP differently.

For copyright, the act of me creating something doesn't deprive you of anything, except the ability to consume or use the thing I created. If I were influenced by something, you can still be influenced by that same thing - I do not exhaust any resources I used.

This is wholely different from physical objects. If I create a knife, I deprive you of the ability to make something else from those natural resources. Natural resources that I didn't create - I merely exploited them.

Because of this, I'm fine with copyright (patents are another story). But I have some issues with physical property.

Post reply on HN