Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you review the code then committing as yourself makes perfect sense to me
If you review a juniors code, do you commit it under your name?
That’s reviewing code vs contributing code.
Copilot edited an ad into my PR
441–450 of 704 posts
Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR
#442Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just submitted my first Claude authored application to Github and noticed this. I actually like it, although anthropomorphizing my coding tools seems a bit weird, it also provides a transparent way for others to weigh the quality of the code. It didn’t even strike me as relevant to hide it, so I’d not exactly call it lazy, rather ask why bother pretending in first place?
Looking back, it would have been neat to have more metadata in my old Git commits. Were there any differences when I was writing with IntelliJ vs VSCode?
Probably your linter, language, or intelligence/whatever tab-complete you used. Claude writes which model they used to write the code, not whether it was in the web ui, tui app, or desktop app.
Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR
#443This is why one reason why local coding models are quite relevant, and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. No ads, and you are in control.
Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR
#444I 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…
It's not a self-own, it's honest disclosure. It's unethical (if not outright fraudulent) to publish LLM work as if it were your own. Claude setting itself as coauthor is a good way to address this problem, and it doing so by default is a very good thing.
I think it depends a lot if you reviewed it as carefully as you would your own code.
Of course most people don’t do that
Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR
#445[flagged]
Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR
#446Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, philosophically speaking, I agree with this approach. But I did read that there was some speculation regarding the future legal implications of signalling that an AI wrote/cowrote a commit. I know Anthropic's been pretty clear that we own the generated code, but if a copyright lawsuit goes sideways (since these were all built with pirated data and licensed code) — does that open you or your company up to litigati…
If you're concerned about copyright risk, don't you want that kind of tagging so you could prove it wasn't used on particular code?
not tagging something doesn't prove AI wasn't used
Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR
#447The ads are annoying, and I'm glad Microsoft will stop doing it. 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 Claud…
So, philosophically speaking, I agree with this approach. But I did read that there was some speculation regarding the future legal implications of signalling that an AI wrote/cowrote a commit. I know Anthropic's been pretty clear that we own the generated code, but if a copyright lawsuit goes sideways (since these were all built with pirated data and licensed code) — does that open you or your company up to litigati…
Let your employer's lawyers worry about that. If they say not to use LLMs, then you should abide by that or find a new job. But if they don't care, then why should you?
As for hobby projects, I strongly encourage you to not care. You aren't going to lawyer up to sue anybody, nor is anybody going to sue you, so YOLO. Do whatever satisfies you.
Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR
#448In case people missed it in the other thread, GitHub have now disabled this: https://twitter.com/martinwoodward/status/203861213108446452... > We've disabled it already. Basically it was giving product tips which was kinda ok on Copilot originated PR's but then when we added the ability to have Copilot work on _any_ PR by mentioning it the behaviour became icky. Disabled product tips entirely thanks to the feedback.
Accepting the megacorp euphemisms without critique ("product tips") is how enshittification festers.
I've not seen any evidence that these were ads and not "tips".
Ads implies someone was paying for them. Promoting internal product features is not the same thing - if it was then every piece of software that shows a tip would be an ad product, and would be regulated as such.
Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR
#449Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Why would I commit something written by AI with myself as author?" Because you're the one who decided to take responsibility for it, and actually choose to PR it in its ultimate form. What utility do the reviews/maintainers get from you marking whats written by you vs. chatgpt? Other than your ability to scapegoat the LLM? The only thing that actually affects me (the hypothetical reviewer) and the project is the qua…
As someone mostly outside of the vibe coding stuff, I can see the benefit in having both the model and the author information. Model information for traceability and possibly future analysis/statistics, and author to know who is taking responsibility for the changes (and, thus, has deeply reviewed and understood them). As long as those two information are present in the commit, I guess which commit field should hold…
Future analysis is a valid reason to keep it, thats a good point and I agree with that.
Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR
#450I 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 would like to know when someone is trying to have the tool do all of their work for them. Absolutely spot on. Maybe I'm old school, but I never let AI touch my commit message history. That is for me - when 6 months down the line I am looking at it, retracing my steps - affirming my thought process and direction of development, I need absolute clarity. That is also because I take pride in my work. If you let an AI…
There will always be room for craftsmen stamping their work, like the expensive Japanese bonsai scissors. Most of the world just uses whatever mass-produced scissors were created by a system of rotating people, with no clear owner/maker. There's plenty of middle ground for systems who put their mark on their product.