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

Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 315 posts

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#271

Post by mrandish »

AlexandrB wrote: post #44

I find it weird how companies talk out both sides of their mouth on AI. On the one hand it's this magical tool that will make you 10x more efficient at your job, and on the other it's something they have to market heavily and shove in your face at every turn - sometimes outright forcing you to engage with it. These two things don't seem compatible - if the tool was that good people would be beating down their doors t…

> if the tool was that good people would be beating down their doors to get it.

Yes! "Forced features" are a misguided effort to drive internal usage metrics. There are other ways to let users know about new features, short of forcing it on them obnoxiously.

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#272

Post by johndhi »

mrandish wrote: post #271
AlexandrB wrote: post #44

I find it weird how companies talk out both sides of their mouth on AI. On the one hand it's this magical tool that will make you 10x more efficient at your job, and on the other it's something they have to market heavily and shove in your face at every turn - sometimes outright forcing you to engage with it. These two things don't seem compatible - if the tool was that good people would be beating down their doors t…

> if the tool was that good people would be beating down their doors to get it. Yes! "Forced features" are a misguided effort to drive internal usage metrics. There are other ways to let users know about new features, short of forcing it on them obnoxiously.

I think investors like to see an adoption. So companies force users to say it - and then brag that their users love their AI so much they're all using it.

It's a rather perverse cycle.

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#273

Post by zahlman »

WhyNotHugo wrote: post #9

> During Microsoft's July 30, 2025 earnings call, CEO Satya Nadella said GitHub Copilot continued to exhibit strong momentum and had reached 20 million users. Considering that they force it upon users and user cannot disable it, this sounds like a worthless metric. I get an email every month telling me that my Copilot access has been renewed for another month. I'm probably being counted amongst those 20M users. I cou…

> I get an email every month telling me that my Copilot access has been renewed for another month.

I don't; any ideas what's different?

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#274

Post by genghisjahn »

non_aligned wrote: post #256
crazygringo wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it makes you far more productive as an individual, which if true should be an easy sell Writing unit tests where needed makes you more productive in the long run. Writing in modern languages makes you more productive. Remember how people writing assembly thought compiled languages would rot your brain! But people just resist change and new ways of doing things. They don't care about actual productivity, they care a…

> Writing unit tests where needed makes you more productive in the long run. Debatable? It has positive effects for organizations and for the society, but from a selfish point of view, you gain relatively little from writing tests. In your own code, a test might save you debugging time once in a blue moon, but the gains are almost certainly offset by the considerable effort of writing a comprehensive suite of tests i…

What are 20 dud languages that have been hyped on HN? Not meaning to snark, serious question.

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#275

Post by crazygringo »

dcminter wrote: post #231
crazygringo wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's what I'm saying. Obviously developers invented these things and initially diffused the knowledge. But you're agreeing with me that they then got enforced top-down. Just like AI. AI isn't new or different like this. Developers started using LLM's for coding, it "diffused" so management became aware, and then it becomes enforced. There's a top-down mandate to use version control or unit testing or code revie…

Sigh, enforced is always top down, sure, if you want to be pedantic. But normally the process starts with enthusiastic devs, propagates out through other devs until a consensus is reached (e.g. source control is the only sane way) and then management starts to enforce it - often with a crappy enterprise take on the basic idea (I'm looking at you IBM Team Connection and Microsoft Visual SourceSafe). AI seems to have p…

It's not pedantic, it's the very issue being discussed.

And there have been plenty of enthusiastic devs regarding LLM's.

And the idea that "until a consensus is reached" is just not true. These practices are often adopted with 1/3 of devs on board and 2/3 against. The whole point of top-down directives is that they're necessary because there isn't broad consensus among employees.

It was the same thing with mobile-first. A lot of devs hated it while others evangelized it, but management would impose it and it made phones usable for a ton of things that had previously been difficult. On the balance, it was a helpful paradigm shift imposed top-down even if it sometimes went overboard.

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#276

Post by cmiles74 »

madeofpalk wrote: post #266
cmiles74 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been paying them a monthly fee for private repositories for as long as I can remember.

Private repositories have been free for… 10 years?

I told you it had been a long time!

It looks like private repos started being free in 2019.

https://github.blog/news-insights/product-news/new-year-new-...

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#278

Post by TiredOfLife »

the__alchemist wrote: post #27
daemin wrote: post #12

I read this article and then looked at my Github and a few other projects and found no issues created by Copilot. As someone else has said they need to be triggered manually, so therefore it's the same sort of problem as with the Curl project bug bounty, where people would be spamming with automatically LLM generated fictional problems. In that case because there's a potential for money to be made, and in the Github…

Same experience. Does anyone have info on this discrepancy in observations?

The article is by theregister.com. Basically The Onion of tech media

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#279

Post by AlotOfReading »

fragmede wrote: post #265
AlotOfReading wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In 2016, GM acquired Cruise for $1 billion or so. It seems like the whole thing was cancelled in 2023, written off, and the CEO was let go It was shut down because they had a collision that made front page news across the country which was followed by a cover-up. Their production lines were shut down, all revenue operations ceased, and the permits they needed to operate were withdrawn. It's not like the decision was…

Waymo's done 10M rides*. If we hand wave $10 per ride, that's $100M. Which is way more money than I have, but not all that much. It's still much bigger than $0 though! * https://www.cbtnews.com/waymo-hits-10m-driverless-rides-eyes...

That number was originally announced in May. They've completed an additional 3M rides since then if they've done no additional scaling. Their average fares are also closer to $15-20 than $10.

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#280

Post by Rover222 »

jcgrillo wrote: post #209
paradox460 wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just for the sake of argument, they could use spinning lenses like you do on a camera in inclement weather

Yeah or some sort of washer/wiper system, but there's much better, safer technology for this. They could just use it.

The front bumper cameras already have a spray wash
Post reply on HN