Live data from Hacker News

GitHub Copilot loses an average of $20 per user per month

thurrott.com

161–170 of 214 posts

Re: GitHub Copilot loses an average of $20 per user per month

#161

Thus, the price of Github Copilot is going to go up, 2x to 5x. For all of the criticism of Github Copilot, for a lot of developers (but not all), the value Github Copilot is incredibly high, much more than $20/month. The current rock bottom pricing is low compared to the value provided for those users. As such there is a big opportunity to multiply the price here being charged. Probably an increase between 3x to 5x.…

I feel like part of the productivity is just moved to reviewers. Every once in a while, I have to review large PRs and find out which comment is AI-generated nonsense. LLMs are really good at fooling us into thinking that code comments make sense. That's why I prefer if devs don't use copilot, but instead cherry pick good output from ChatGPT.

Earlier this year, we had this one developer who has worked with us for a while (8 months or so). He was never a top developer, but he was average.

Anyway, I have to review all of his code, and I've been doing this the whole time he worked for us. But, starting around the beginning of the year, I started to notice problem after problem coming through his merge requests (MRs). At first I gave the guy the benefit of the doubt, like I said this was unusual for him. He always needed moderate coaching, but the mistake ratio was way higher than usual.

Anyway, I did some basic coaching and whatever. I talked to him about the increase in errors and he said he was stressed with moving to a new house at the time. It made sense, so I decided not to even record the first performance review with HR.

But the problems kept coming and getting worse. It was getting to the point that he had so many problems, I wouldn't even address them all. I would only kick back the top dozen or so. I was noticing that his code had entirely different styling and voice across methods like it wasn't written by him. I also started to see weird lines that were trying to catch unusual edge cases that would never even apply in our scenario. There was one time where there was this insanely complex filter that fed into an insane regex that I couldn't decipher. I asked him about what it is even trying to do and he had no clue, he couldn't even explain the purpose of the line, let alone how it worked. I pushed him on where it came from and he said "StackOverflow". But I reversed searched it and couldn't find it.

We ended up doing performance reviews almost weekly for a while, and now I was formally writing them up. I told him that he was more of a burden on the company at this point. He was offering a negative value. I was getting stressed out because I was spending so long fixing his code and coaching him, that I was working longer hours because of him. Furthermore, I could have fired him and not even replaced him, just taken over his job myself and it would have been less work than this back and forth of trying to repair his work.

Eventually I did fire him. After he left and I talked to the team about him being let go, one of his friends told me that this guy had been using ChatGPT and Copilot for all of his work. It was a secret because our company doesn't allow AI tools in our codebase right now because of compliance reasons. Which is why he would rather say his mistakes were "copypasta from StackOverflow" as he always put it, than admit it was copilot.

That's not to say that CoPilot is bad. But its not ready to replace developers just yet. Even junior developers still need to wrangle and check the work coming out of the AI. And yes, people do notice. Even after this employee polishing the work coming out of the AI model, it still wouldn't work in our codebase.

And to the original point. Yes, these AI tools really are just passing increased burden onto the experienced developers. The juniors are using these tools as crutches to speed things up so they can watch more YouTube videos. But the code gatekeepers who have to defend the application are the ones with increased burden and workloads of fixing the mistakes the AI is generating. I've been saying for a long time that AI will simply separate the good from the bad in software development. For the past 15 years you could make $150k or more a year as a developer that is only capable of producing sub-par code. But those days are gone. The sub-par code is being produced by AI now. So you need to be at least mediocre now.

Re: GitHub Copilot loses an average of $20 per user per month

#163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> for a lot of developers (but not all), the value Github Copilot is incredibly high, much more than $20/month. I really doubt this. IMO, the jury is still out deciding if the value is above zero for enough people to matter.

Are we talking about Copilot in particular or AI code assistants in general? The value, for me, is extremely high. My teammates feel the same. Our shared opinion/experience is that ChatGPT 4 is better than Copilot in general but Copilot shines in-editor because it's aware of your project. So we use both in tandem. They mostly use Chat GPT and I split about 50%/50%. (Note: I'm using the Copilot X beta which I believe…

> If I need to traverse a tree or list or something, I'm letting AI write that code. Could I write it myself faster? No, and it's going to have an off-by-one error some non-zero portion of the time if I write it.

Many languages/companies have existing well understood solutions that _won't_ have errors. Maybe that is the disconnect? I can't remember the last non-interview time I had to write a non-trivial traversal.

Re: GitHub Copilot loses an average of $20 per user per month

#164

Capitalism cracks me up. We live under this fantasy that everything we do can be turned into a profitable business. Even the government should be run like a business, right? Like somehow educating a child for 12+ years should be a profitable venture. Or housing the elderly. Or providing a basic service like water, sanitation or electricity that everyone uses at about the same rate. Surely we can stand on each other t…

It will not be free; payment will simply shift to the hardware and data used to train the model, etc.

Re: GitHub Copilot loses an average of $20 per user per month

#165

GitHub’s CoPilot is the most disappointing of AI products out there.

For some developers for sure, but not all. I am a senior developer with +20 years of experience and I find Github Copilot amazing. It significantly boosts my productivity. I do not expect the world from it, and I do run into limitations, but it helps me tremendously to be productive in languages and tools which I have low/no familiarity. I think Github Copilot paired with ChatGPT fails the most in idiosyncratic code…

To clarify, I have been paying the 10$ since it was released last year. I used it in neovim, vscode and found it helpful.

Cut to few months later with OpenAI API release, so many code completers released in many useful form factors willing to go wherever I code even if its Android Studio or Xcode. The product has stagnated completely.

I do expect it to change significantly in the future though, might go back then.

Re: GitHub Copilot loses an average of $20 per user per month

#166
post #125
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From that article: 1.5m users and up to 50% of their code is now being produced by Copilot. Sounds to me like the verdict on its value is in already.

The quote from the article says "more than 1.5 million people have used it and it is helping build nearly half of Copilot users’ code" Not a native speaker, but to me this sounds much more ambiguous than up to 50% of code is produced by Copilot. Also, how different from previous solutions is this actually? I use autocomplete and code snippets extensively. Never measured it , but I wouldn't be surprised if my IDE had…

It doesn't sound ambiguous to me. It says that those people have Copilot enabled while they write more than half of their code. AKA it's on the editor they use for most things.

It doesn't say anything about its value.

Re: GitHub Copilot loses an average of $20 per user per month

#167

I would gladly pay for copilot 5 USD a month (its an specific use case IA), but the current price point 20 month is incredible expensive it only add costs if the developer you are hiring requires it to properly function... thats the only value it adds. IMHO If you are a code monkey copilot makes you a 5x developer, 10x if you have 5+ years of experience on the business Maybe selling tokens/search could be benefitial…

$20 a month is incredibly expensive? If it saves 15 minutes over a month, it pays for itself (assuming your work is ~$100/hr). If it can provide any positive value, it is going to be worth more the $5 a month.

Maybe if you live around the bay area where you get paid absurd money by the hour for a job that can be done overseas for 10 bucks, outside or the rest of the world that 100 usd is per week tops, thats way too much i would pay for service that only barely helps my in my day to day...

If you need to constantly use chatgpt/copilot to do your job properly, maybe its time to learn something else because your job will be automated sooner or later, what will be more cheaper a 100/hr or the 20/month service.

Re: GitHub Copilot loses an average of $20 per user per month

#168
post #10

How came that usually privacy-minded hn crowd uses run-by-someone-else models so cheerfully and carelessly? You do realize any data sent to MS/openai/anyone will be stored forever and probably be used against you in the (near) future?

HN's privacy-minded crowd and HN's AI-obsessed crowd don't have much crossover, I don't think.

I bet there is an age gap; the former are older than the latter.

Re: GitHub Copilot loses an average of $20 per user per month

#169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think most dev laptops have 8GB+ of GPU memory, which (based on ollama requirements) seems like it's on the low-mid end of the requirements. I've tried experimenting with some local models and: a) They're much slower on my 6GB laptop GPU b) The seem to not be as good, functionally b) I can't make use of larger models I haven't done more than just some experimentation but I can see how this would make sense to…

At 600$+/y subscription fees, it makes sense to own a beefy NUC with 32Gb and a speedy SSD to run the model locally.

I would hope developers value their time at least 100USD/hour. So unless the local option is less than 5 hours per year of maintenance, the subscription makes sense.

Re: GitHub Copilot loses an average of $20 per user per month

#170
post #13
post #6

Copilot is useless compared to chat-gpt4. There's really no comparison. As far as the costs, it seems like transmitting things repeatedly would be more expensive than the chat model where you just transmit things when you want them.

Copilot is chat gpt4, and has been since roughly April. It's built on top of it.

It's not GPT-4, it's gpt-3.5-turbo (or a variant there-of). Source: I'm sitting in the audience of a talk about it at AI Engineering summit right now, the speaker confirmed it as gpt-3.5-turbo, switched from Codex.
Post reply on HN