361–370 of 704 posts
I asked copilot how developers would react if AI agents put ads in their PRs. >Developers would react extremely negatively. This would be seen as 1. A massive breach of trust. 2. Unprofessional and disruptive. 3. A security/integrity concern. 4. Career-ending for the product. The backlash would likely be swift and severe. Sometimes AI can be right.
I asked copilot how developers would react if AI agents put ads in their PRs. >Developers would react extremely negatively. This would be seen as 1. A massive breach of trust. 2. Unprofessional and disruptive. 3. A security/integrity concern. 4. Career-ending for the product. The backlash would likely be swift and severe. Sometimes AI can be right.
It’s not really ads, it’s more like "Sent from my iPhone"-style sentences at the end of PR texts.
Sent from Firefox on AlmaLinux 9. https://getfirefox.com https://almalinux.org
I actually love these ads and also the way Claude injects itself as a co-author. Seeing them is an easy signal to recognize work that was submitted by someone so lazy they couldn’t even edit the commit message. You can see the vibe coded PRs right away. I think we should continue encouraging AI-generated PRs to label themselves, honestly. I’m not against AI coding tools, but I would like to know when someone is tryin…
I actually love these ads and also the way Claude injects itself as a co-author. Seeing them is an easy signal to recognize work that was submitted by someone so lazy they couldn’t even edit the commit message. You can see the vibe coded PRs right away. I think we should continue encouraging AI-generated PRs to label themselves, honestly. I’m not against AI coding tools, but I would like to know when someone is tryin…
> Seeing them is an easy signal to recognize work that was submitted by someone so lazy they couldn’t even edit the commit message. You can see the vibe coded PRs right away.
I was doing the opposite when using ChatGPT. Specifically manually setting the git commit author as ChatGPT complete with model used, and setting myself as committer. That way I (and everyone else) can see what parts of the code were completely written by ChatGPT.
For changes that I made myself, I commit with myself as author.
Why would I commit something written by AI with myself as author?
> I think we should continue encouraging AI-generated PRs to label themselves, honestly.
Exactly.
One thing I do like, however, is how agents add themselves as co-authors in commit messages. Having a signal for which commits are by hand and which are by agent is very useful, both for you and in aggregate (to see how well you are wielding AI, and the quality of the code being generated).
Even when I edit the commit message, I still leave in the Claude co-author note.
AI coding is a new skill that we're all still figuring out, so this will help us develop best practices for generating quality code.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
We are not training on the contents of private repos, but we do plan on training on usage data with Copilot unless you opt out before April 24. Details here: https://github.blog/news-insights/company-news/updates-to-gi... That post has a link to the FAQ which might also be helpful: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/188488
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’ve felt similarly about moving off GitHub. I bought a small 5U server rack years ago for my home network setup. I’m considering getting a 1U device to host my own git server. I feel like if I move off, I should do it generally vs just moving to another provider who may also pull shenanigans.
For low-resource usage, Forgejo has a good reputation: https://forgejo.org ie you can run it effectively on even a Raspberry Pi Remember to ensure you have proper backups regardless of whatever you decide to host it on. :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> It’s rather bold to post here… it is rather nice, honestly. would you prefer to scream into the void and not get any response at all? an open line of communication with the responsible people seems like literally the best possible option, why are you actively discouraging it? > Maybe you all want to talk to Microsoft PR/legal before posting? you would rather not hear anything, or get word-salad legalese that doesnt…
The responses are affecting my impression of Microsoft and Github extremely negatively. I don’t think I am alone.
It’s already pretty word salad legalese in my opinion, at least from Github.