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

Copilot edited an ad into my PR

notes.zachmanson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 704 posts

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#461

Post by ulbu »

martinwoodward wrote: post #275
buildbot wrote: post #268

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

why not make it opt-in?

and I wonder if this opt-out applies to data we stored under your umbrella before having opted-out.

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#462

Post by pesus »

martinwoodward wrote: post #275
buildbot wrote: post #268

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

Why such strong opposition to getting user consent before doing any of this? Not respecting consent seems to be a very common theme with MS these days, and it really doesn't reflect well on the company or you personally.

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#463

Post by jacobgkau »

corndoge wrote: post #424
nemomarx wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you review a juniors code, do you commit it under your name?

A junior is a person. A tool is a tool. Do you credit your text editor with authorship?

False equivalence. A text editor does not type characters that you didn't explicitly type or select.

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#464

Post by homebrewer »

smrtinsert wrote: post #392
QuantumNomad_ wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> […] 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 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 e…

If you review the code then committing as yourself makes perfect sense to me

Linux has used "Reviewed-by" trailers for many years. If you've only done minor editing, or none at all, it's something to consider.

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#465

Post by Henchman21 »

timrogers wrote: post #250

Tim from the Copilot coding agent team here. We've now disabled these tips in pull requests created by or touched by Copilot, so you won't see this happen again for future PRs. We've been including product tips in PRs created by Copilot coding agent. The goal was to help developers learn new ways to use the agent in their workflow. But hearing the feedback here, and on reflection, this was the wrong judgement call. W…

WE won't see it happen again ... UNTIL IT DOES! You guys are disingenuous actors. Bad faith and all that.

See, what I expect is that you or someone on your team will move on internally, and then all promises made will be not just forgotten, but tossed aside with relief. Because this is The Way within MS now. All projects are just fodder for your CV, and when you get that paybump/position you want some other completely unscrupulous actor will join and implement the same. exact. thing.

Edit: Wow this is a shitshow. It's almost like you dumb fuckers have burned up ALL THE GOODWILL YOU HAD LEFT.

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#466

Post by Forgeties79 »

yarn_ wrote: post #419
Forgeties79 wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Whoever is submitting the code is still responsible for it, why would the reviewer care if you wrote it with your fingers or if an LLM wrote (parts of) it? Maybe one day we can say that, but currently, it matters a lot to a lot of people for many reasons.

> Likewise, leaving AI attribution in will probably have the opposite effect as well, where a perfectly good few lines of code gets rejected because some reviewer saw it was claude and assumed it was slop. Neither of these cases seems helpful to anyone (obviously its not like AI can't write a single useable line of code)." That was my point here, it is a false signal in both directions.

According to you it’s all false. I don’t agree, and it certainly shouldn’t just be taken as a given.

For instance, I would want any AI generated video showing real people to have a disclaimer. Same way we have disclaimers when tv ads note if the people are actors or not with testimonials and the like. That is not only not false, but is actually a useful signal that helps present overly deceptive practices.

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#467

Post by flumes_whims_ »

hk__2 wrote: post #361
ses1984 wrote: post #356

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.

If it only mentioned made with copilot that would be one thing, but it didn't just mention Copilot. It advertised a different third party app.

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#468

Post by josephg »

corndoge wrote: post #429
Krssst wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Yeah, nothing wrong with keeping the metadata - but "Authored-by" is both credit and an attestation of responsibility. I think people just haven't thought about it too much and see it mostly as credit and less as responsibility.

I disagree. “Authored by” - and authorship in general - says who did the work. Not who signed off on the work. Reviewed-by me, authored by Claude feels most correct.

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#469

Post by odst »

timrogers wrote: post #250

Tim from the Copilot coding agent team here. We've now disabled these tips in pull requests created by or touched by Copilot, so you won't see this happen again for future PRs. We've been including product tips in PRs created by Copilot coding agent. The goal was to help developers learn new ways to use the agent in their workflow. But hearing the feedback here, and on reflection, this was the wrong judgement call. W…

"We won't do something like this again"

Sureeeeee

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#470

Post by godzillabrennus »

hk__2 wrote: post #361
ses1984 wrote: post #356

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.

It's not an ad, it's a message from our sponsor.

This message brought to you by TempleOS

Post reply on HN