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

40% of the code GitHub Copilot users check-in is AI generated and unmodified

microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 129 posts

Re: 40% of the code GitHub Copilot users check-in is AI generated and unmodified

#101

Post by arp242 »

sph wrote: post #69

Aside: am I the only one here that is still writing code by hand and not using AI to autogenerate it? Because it seems over the past couple years on HN everybody is making great use of Copilot and constantly talking about it, while honestly scaffolding boilerplate is the least of my problems, while thinking, designing and abstracting novel ideas into code is the hard part where AI would fall short and just waste my t…

I tried it out, but didn't find it all that helpful. Maybe part of that is just getting used to it. I'm also worried about the long-term effects: I have a much better understanding of things if I write it myself. There's a kind of "practice" involved every time you write something (code, documentation, prose, music, anything) and I'm not so sure losing that is a good thing in the long run. Proof-read a thousand books probably won't make you a great author.

Re: 40% of the code GitHub Copilot users check-in is AI generated and unmodified

#102

Post by worrycue »

tasuki wrote: post #91
worrycue wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you trust it though? It can’t really reason - it’s just very good at guessing the right answer if there are a lot of examples. It also lies somewhat frequently. If we have to double check its output, it kind of defeats the purpose - at least part of it - as the “cognitive burden” is still on us. P.S. Not sure what you mean by “lining up” Haskell types … but don’t LSPs already give us clear information about the i…

> Not sure what you mean by “lining up” Haskell types … but don’t LSPs already give us clear information about the inferred types and do so with nigh zero chance of errors. I don't mean type inference but turning the present type a into the required type b. LSP don't do that.

Still learning Haskell, don't quite get what you are saying. But I will probably figure it out someday.

Re: 40% of the code GitHub Copilot users check-in is AI generated and unmodified

#103

Post by worrycue »

tasuki wrote: post #89
worrycue wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you trust it though? It can’t really reason - it’s just very good at guessing the right answer if there are a lot of examples. It also lies somewhat frequently. If we have to double check its output, it kind of defeats the purpose - at least part of it - as the “cognitive burden” is still on us. P.S. Not sure what you mean by “lining up” Haskell types … but don’t LSPs already give us clear information about the i…

> Can you trust it though? Yes of course. Libraries: I look at the libraries it suggests, see if they have documentation or GitHub activity. Lining up types: say you have a `List (Maybe a)` and require a `Maybe (List a)`. This is a simple example, of course real life is much more complicated. ChatGPT tells you. Can you trust it? Well did it make the compile error go away? (Sure, I can think of three ways to turn a `L…

I guess if you use it like Google for small nuggets of information you can easily fact check, it's fine.

Although might as well just use Google directly which will send you either to Stack Overflow or Reddit where there are comments discussing the issue with back and forth fleshing it out or to a bunch of tutorial sites where you can source opinions from each site.

edit: nevermind the attempt at your puzzle, my solution doesn't work.

Re: 40% of the code GitHub Copilot users check-in is AI generated and unmodified

#104

Post by js8 »

circuit10 wrote: post #88
js8 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real question is, why we need to write "trivial" code? I think people have lost the plot there. We should be writing better compilers and libraries, instead of using AI that will write more code to deal with. The obsession with code generation instead of creating proper abstractions is a scourge of today's programming. It's a regression in software engineering.

I guess one difference is that Copilot can guess things that it’s not sure about and have you check over it, but a compiler can’t just guess what you want it it would be very unreliable

Compilers do however guess that you don't want something - it's called compiler warnings. Linters do that as well. To me what you describe is more about how we communicate with compilers than an inherent limitation.

Re: 40% of the code GitHub Copilot users check-in is AI generated and unmodified

#105

Post by pbronez »

worrycue wrote: post #103
tasuki wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can you trust it though? Yes of course. Libraries: I look at the libraries it suggests, see if they have documentation or GitHub activity. Lining up types: say you have a `List (Maybe a)` and require a `Maybe (List a)`. This is a simple example, of course real life is much more complicated. ChatGPT tells you. Can you trust it? Well did it make the compile error go away? (Sure, I can think of three ways to turn a `L…

I guess if you use it like Google for small nuggets of information you can easily fact check, it's fine. Although might as well just use Google directly which will send you either to Stack Overflow or Reddit where there are comments discussing the issue with back and forth fleshing it out or to a bunch of tutorial sites where you can source opinions from each site. edit: nevermind the attempt at your puzzle, my solut…

My experience has been that generative AI gives you a useful layer of abstraction above direct search. It’s like having an intern Google stuff for you, check out some promising results, and send you an email summarizing what they found. They make mistakes, but are generally ok.

You wouldn’t actually have an intern do this because the delegation takes more time than doing it yourself. With GenerativeAI, it’s snappy.

Re: 40% of the code GitHub Copilot users check-in is AI generated and unmodified

#106

Post by ashwagary »

jaredcwhite wrote: post #75
sph wrote: post #69

Aside: am I the only one here that is still writing code by hand and not using AI to autogenerate it? Because it seems over the past couple years on HN everybody is making great use of Copilot and constantly talking about it, while honestly scaffolding boilerplate is the least of my problems, while thinking, designing and abstracting novel ideas into code is the hard part where AI would fall short and just waste my t…

Indeed you are not. I've never used any generative AI tools when coding or otherwise, and continue to refuse to at this point in time.

>I've never used any generative AI tools when coding or otherwise

I'm in the same boat but I must admit the temptation is increasing.

Re: 40% of the code GitHub Copilot users check-in is AI generated and unmodified

#107

Post by powerapple »

sph wrote: post #69

Aside: am I the only one here that is still writing code by hand and not using AI to autogenerate it? Because it seems over the past couple years on HN everybody is making great use of Copilot and constantly talking about it, while honestly scaffolding boilerplate is the least of my problems, while thinking, designing and abstracting novel ideas into code is the hard part where AI would fall short and just waste my t…

when designing, thinking, abstracting, we are actually not writing any code. I sometimes use a whiteboard for example, of course CoPilot cannot help. Once we have your designed, thought-through implementation in your head, while you are typing in an editor, CoPilot definitely can help you write code faster (or slower if the output is not exactly what you have in your mind). I see it is a productive positive product.

Re: 40% of the code GitHub Copilot users check-in is AI generated and unmodified

#108

Post by worrycue »

pbronez wrote: post #105
worrycue wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess if you use it like Google for small nuggets of information you can easily fact check, it's fine. Although might as well just use Google directly which will send you either to Stack Overflow or Reddit where there are comments discussing the issue with back and forth fleshing it out or to a bunch of tutorial sites where you can source opinions from each site. edit: nevermind the attempt at your puzzle, my solut…

My experience has been that generative AI gives you a useful layer of abstraction above direct search. It’s like having an intern Google stuff for you, check out some promising results, and send you an email summarizing what they found. They make mistakes, but are generally ok. You wouldn’t actually have an intern do this because the delegation takes more time than doing it yourself. With GenerativeAI, it’s snappy.

Adds another thing that can go wrong though. It doesn't cite its sources either, does it? I have seen people ask it to explain but it's explanation can be wrong too ...

Re: 40% of the code GitHub Copilot users check-in is AI generated and unmodified

#109

Post by parthianshotgun »

sph wrote: post #100
KyeRussell wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weird flex or whatever dude. But all I’m hearing is that your anxiety has led you to a) refuse to look into a new piece of technology, b) hold incorrect views on it (like that it’s only useful for boilerplate code), c) look down on those that ARE using it, and d) pose that your incredible experience is why this wouldn’t be useful to you. If you can’t find your drive to look at new things enough to even see if they’re…

I'm sorry, but I do not get why you're making it personal and attacking my worth as a developer because I am doubtful about what Copilot can do for me. It is possible to disagree without being rude and insulting.

I think you're speaking to a, most likely, young developer. Having dealt with many similar sentiments, a few more years usually smooths this out. I always wonder if tech work is good for certain personalities, it's quite easy to carry on with a misanthropic communication style and still succeed

Re: 40% of the code GitHub Copilot users check-in is AI generated and unmodified

#110

Post by JustSomeNobody »

powerapple wrote: post #107
sph wrote: post #69

Aside: am I the only one here that is still writing code by hand and not using AI to autogenerate it? Because it seems over the past couple years on HN everybody is making great use of Copilot and constantly talking about it, while honestly scaffolding boilerplate is the least of my problems, while thinking, designing and abstracting novel ideas into code is the hard part where AI would fall short and just waste my t…

when designing, thinking, abstracting, we are actually not writing any code. I sometimes use a whiteboard for example, of course CoPilot cannot help. Once we have your designed, thought-through implementation in your head, while you are typing in an editor, CoPilot definitely can help you write code faster (or slower if the output is not exactly what you have in your mind). I see it is a productive positive product.

> CoPilot definitely can help you write code faster(or slower if the output is not exactly what you have in your mind). I see it is a productive positive product.

The actual act of writing code "faster" baffles me. Without tools like intellisense, etc.[0], I am perfectly able to write code as fast as I can type.

There's absolutely zero need for me to write faster.

[0]Intellisense, etc. tend to get in my way, so I turn it off.

Post reply on HN