[flagged]
AI-Generated GitHub Copilot “Autofix” Allowed Compromise of Snowflake's Jira
121–130 of 179 posts
Re: AI-Generated GitHub Copilot “Autofix” Allowed Compromise of Snowflake's Jira
#122[flagged]
Re: AI-Generated GitHub Copilot “Autofix” Allowed Compromise of Snowflake's Jira
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
It can be that while also causing problems. It's like when a self driving car crashes, it's big news and everyone runs around like their pants are on fire. When a human driver crashes, it's a blip on local news or not even that.
Difference is in how you sell it. We all know that people make mistakes. I.e. crash a car from time to time. We all are sold a view that AI will save humanity, cure all diseases, solve all problems, allow for autonomous driving and many other (lies?). While making basic mistakes or crashing on trivial crossroads.. Hype is way overblown.
[deleted]
Re: AI-Generated GitHub Copilot “Autofix” Allowed Compromise of Snowflake's Jira
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
Difference is you are not a trillion dollar plus technology hyped as a harbinger of civilisational change.
I mean… it’s only Monday! But yes, there is an interesting change in the past decade, where everything new must be over-hyped. Perhaps it is attention overload and needing to shout. Perhaps it’s that technological progress has significantly slowed while communication options have exploded (coincidence?). I look at it a lot like EVs. They’re great, if your use case is inside the specific band. But, that isn’t who they…
> But yes, there is an interesting change in the past decade, where everything new must be over-hyped.
Or, it's that the last two years have been the largest and fastest shift in the daily life of a programmer since the compiler, with near everyone moving, simultaneously, to this new tech, not because of hype, but because of practical personal benefit.
Regardless, everything being hyped isn't new. There's always been silly hype in tech.
Re: AI-Generated GitHub Copilot “Autofix” Allowed Compromise of Snowflake's Jira
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but withhold from others, even though the code change itself is likely small. Prediction: programming is going to change massively not only because the cost of creating code will go down, but because people are so tired of this sort of gatekeeping "we know better" from programmers.
Lots of responses to a comment I explicitly did not make. Let me try and spell it out for you folks: demand was suppressed by an access bottleneck, the bottleneck is gone, expect a magnitude of change proportional to how much demand was actually pent up rather than proportional to how much programmers currently think was reasonable to deny. Explicit things I am not saying: gatekeeping was bad, feature creep is good o…
This really makes it sound as though the programmers were doing something wrong:
> people are so tired of this sort of gatekeeping "we know better" from programmers
Re: AI-Generated GitHub Copilot “Autofix” Allowed Compromise of Snowflake's Jira
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but withhold from others, even though the code change itself is likely small. Prediction: programming is going to change massively not only because the cost of creating code will go down, but because people are so tired of this sort of gatekeeping "we know better" from programmers.
Can you explain to all of us how this gatekeeping is actually bad? Software would be way, way worse if we just allowed any arbitrary feature to be added to software, and ordinary people who want all the things would have to learn, the hard way, that doing all the things is not actually good.
Thank you. I'm spending a lot of time reminding my peers that cheerlead this sort of thing that feedback is usually presented to us a solution, not the underlying problem and that our job is to solve problems, not just vomit out the requested solution.
Re: AI-Generated GitHub Copilot “Autofix” Allowed Compromise of Snowflake's Jira
#127Re: AI-Generated GitHub Copilot “Autofix” Allowed Compromise of Snowflake's Jira
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
The things done in yaml today would've been obscure bash oneliners had YAML not existed. Jenkins still exists and it's no less complicated than Github Actions. The complexity gets hidden in obscure script files, obscure tabbed UI, and remote services for doing things Jenkins itself can't do. Defaulting to system tooling makes it almost impossible to predict what a job will do unless you know exactly how paths and too…
> You could copy-paste the Jenkins job, but unless you have Jabberwocky v2018.3 installed in /home/JabberWock/RELEASE, the script will fail. In my experience, containerization resolved this issue. Now you just need to be able to "docker run public.ecr.aws/carroll/jabberwocky:v2018.3 [etc]".
And in Github that would be something like:
steps:
- name: Run jabberwocky
run: docker run -it public.ecr.aws/carroll/jabberwocky:v2018.3 [etc]Re: AI-Generated GitHub Copilot “Autofix” Allowed Compromise of Snowflake's Jira
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
The things done in yaml today would've been obscure bash oneliners had YAML not existed. Jenkins still exists and it's no less complicated than Github Actions. The complexity gets hidden in obscure script files, obscure tabbed UI, and remote services for doing things Jenkins itself can't do. Defaulting to system tooling makes it almost impossible to predict what a job will do unless you know exactly how paths and too…
Except that YAML in almost every devops or CI workflow is YAML plus obscure bash oneliners. Or it's an obscure bash oneliner hidden in another repository as a package that you can depend on, which is either wrapped by another YAML config or maybe some JS. I don't think the criticisms of Jenkins compare because Jenkins is really much more than a CI layer, predates the concept of devops and our modern understanding of…
> in almost every devops or CI workflow
But that's the core of the problem, isn't it? People setting up devops environments are the reason these flows are so complicated. You can set up the same flows by having Jenkins call out to Jenkins to trigger chains of jobs that can conditionally fail.
People generally don't do it, because there are better alternatives out there for when you want those types of pipelines (which includes Github Actions and their counterparts). Setting up a four-step build+test+scan+tag+push+deploy pipeline in Jenkins is just as hard as it is with Github, if not harder. [Jenkinsfile](https://www.jenkins.io/doc/book/pipeline/jenkinsfile/) is just YAML with extra parentheses.
The modern YAML files are a simplification of the manual steps required to do it all in tools that predated the YAML files. There's nothing stopping you from having a Github runner configuration that's just a call to a single Docker image containing all the bash/perl/Makefile/Kotlinscript/Go/Ruby/etc. files you want to execute. Or you can forego the Docker part and run code directly inside of the repository, with all the security risks that come with it (not dissimilar to having a fully open Jenkins server).
Complicated YAML is a symptom. It's no better or worse than Bash or TOML or Makefile when you start adding conditional automation and multi-step CI/CD flows.
Re: AI-Generated GitHub Copilot “Autofix” Allowed Compromise of Snowflake's Jira
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
Difference is you are not a trillion dollar plus technology hyped as a harbinger of civilisational change.
It can be that while also causing problems. It's like when a self driving car crashes, it's big news and everyone runs around like their pants are on fire. When a human driver crashes, it's a blip on local news or not even that.
When a human driver controlling a bus crashes though it's a big story. Even bigger when it's a train. News scales with novelty and people impacted - 1 driver being a problem isn't an issue, an ai system used in many cars... That is more newsworthy.