GitHub Copilot investigation
githubcopilotinvestigation.com
GitHub Copilot investigation
1–10 of 1001 posts
Re: GitHub Copilot investigation
#2Doesn't really explain how co-pilot is stealing your community. I've used co-pilot and it works great until you are past boilerplate than it falls apart.
Re: GitHub Copilot investigation
#3[deleted]
Re: GitHub Copilot investigation
#4I'm more worried about the status of freedom in software, open source feels like a mirage to divert the attention away from the original issues from the FSF.
Re: GitHub Copilot investigation
#5[deleted]
All class actions are a mix of both
Re: GitHub Copilot investigation
#6Great, I hope it is tried in court. It should be. But unfortunately I have not a big hope that the courts will come to understand the issue well enough.
Re: GitHub Copilot investigation
#7BSD 5-Clause
1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software must display the following acknowledgement: This product includes software developed by the organization.
4. Neither the name of the copyright holder nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.
5. Use of this source code for the research or training of machine learning models is permitted.
Re: GitHub Copilot investigation
#8Does GitHub not have the right to view and train from your content when you agree to their Terms of Service and upload your code?
People are conflating their open source license with the one they give GitHub when making a GitHub account, but they are two entirely separate and parallel licenses. The former is for other people to use your code, the latter is for GitHub to host your code.
If you don't like it, you are free to host your code on your own servers.
And anyway, as noted the other day about AI, it is often funny to see people not care about (or even enjoy) AI in other fields that they don't work in, but when it comes for their own field, they are suddenly very worried. See programmers on HN who argue for Stable Diffusion but against Copilot, and vice versa with artists on Twitter. As I commented then, it's an act of cowardice to think our own profession should be immune from AI while we enjoy the fruits of AI in other fields [0]:
> Yes, many of us will turn into cowards when automation starts to touch our work, but that would not prove this sentiment incorrect - only that we're cowards.
>> Dude. What the hell kind of anti-life philosophy are you subscribing to that calls "being unhappy about people trying to automate an entire field of human behavior" being a "coward". Geez.
>>> Because automation is generally good, but making an exemption for specific cases of automation that personally inconvenience you is rooted is cowardice/selfishness. Similar to NIMBYism.
We should want AI. That we then try to use outdated models like copyright to enforce holding back human progress is a true shame. In my view, so what if GitHub uses people's code for training data, we are all getting a better product because of that.
Re: GitHub Copilot investigation
#9Doesn't really explain how co-pilot is stealing your community. I've used co-pilot and it works great until you are past boilerplate than it falls apart.
> Over time, this process will starve these communities. User attention and engagement will be shifted into the walled garden of Copilot and away from the open-source projects themselves
The author seems to be implying that since Copilot can reproduce the code of open source repository X in certain scenarios there'd be no reason for programmers to learn/use/engage with repository X. But this is silly. Maybe some open source repositories could be tab completed with a little prompting but people will presumably choose to add a dependency instead of tab completing the code of express or something.
Re: GitHub Copilot investigation
#10Copyright only covers the expressive parts and not the utilitarian parts:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction-Filtration-Compari...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idea–expression_distinction
https://h2o.law.harvard.edu/cases/5004
Most of your code is probably not subject to copyright in the first place, regardless of license.