51–60 of 257 posts
I may be missing something, but this is exactly what I want as a default. I want the session links there. I see PRs from my coworkers with session links. I still get to control whether other people can see the session, but I don’t lose it. I don’t get the “unprofessional” argument. This is attribution. Attribution is professional. If you don’t want it, you turn it off or rewrite the commit messages. If you are having…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s a default that changed silently during an automatic update. Also I frequently use an LLM to commit work that I have written. It is just misleading in that case.
What's misleading? Wouldn't the session corroborate that it was only used for the commit?
I may be missing something, but this is exactly what I want as a default. I want the session links there. I see PRs from my coworkers with session links. I still get to control whether other people can see the session, but I don’t lose it. I don’t get the “unprofessional” argument. This is attribution. Attribution is professional. If you don’t want it, you turn it off or rewrite the commit messages. If you are having…
From my point of view; I share Debian's perspective: https://lwn.net/Articles/1091231/ Which is actually why I DON'T like the session amended. Ultimately it is an ad placed into the Git log, and noise at that. Regardless of if it exists or not, the professional responsibility for what is contained in that PR/commit falls to the feet of the developer contributing it. Microsoft previously did this with Copilot, which w…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It has strong "Sent from my iPhone" vibes. I use many tools to develop software and if my IDE would silently start adding "This commit was created with IntelliJ IDEA Ultimate" I'd find it intrusive and obnoxious, too.
A traditional IDE isn’t writing code for you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> AI does not enjoy copyright protection. Pretending you created something written by AI is copyfraud. Which court has made a ruling on this? The only decision I'm aware of was that some Gen-AI artwork couldn't be copyrightable if it was made without substantial input, direction, and scrutiny.
Once again, I will point you to the law, https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10922 You did not write it, the AI did. Either the work cannot be copyright, or the AI owner (Anthropic) owns the code. Not you. In no case can you own code you didn't write. You guys keep arguing that it enjoys copyright protection without realizing this part. There is no "work-for-hire" default in the law for AI even if it did enjoy co…
(I would also argue whether it matters in practice the other way: if something was AI generated, it is in principle cheap for someone else to generate it separately anyway: if you're wanting to copy AI generated code then there's probably some part of the ideas in it that are valuable beyond what the AI can output on its own)
(Also, this uncertainty does still mean that it's probably prudent to record which parts of your software are generated and which are not: it's a conceivable outcome that some company winds up in court and manages to argue that the human-generated parts are still covered under copyright, but are unable to point to which parts those are and therefore lose it entirely)
I cancelled my subscription over this [1]. 1: https://x.com/m_herrmann/status/2092579839676948495
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s a default that changed silently during an automatic update. Also I frequently use an LLM to commit work that I have written. It is just misleading in that case.
What's misleading? Wouldn't the session corroborate that it was only used for the commit?
I think some folks think that using an LLM is a shameful act and this is somehow shaming it and others believe that it ties back to the conversation. These conversations don't have any guarantee of being accessible over the long haul. If there was value in the conversation, the conversation should be somehow captured as well, not just some URLs.
Anthropic is right here. You need to clearly define what commits are AI authored or you are conspiring to commit copyfraud. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyfraud AI does not enjoy copyright protection. Pretending you created something written by AI is copyfraud.
I may be missing something, but this is exactly what I want as a default. I want the session links there. I see PRs from my coworkers with session links. I still get to control whether other people can see the session, but I don’t lose it. I don’t get the “unprofessional” argument. This is attribution. Attribution is professional. If you don’t want it, you turn it off or rewrite the commit messages. If you are having…
I don't understand why it isn't opt-in. Or at least a heads-up somewhere.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It has strong "Sent from my iPhone" vibes. I use many tools to develop software and if my IDE would silently start adding "This commit was created with IntelliJ IDEA Ultimate" I'd find it intrusive and obnoxious, too.
A traditional IDE isn’t writing code for you.