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

Updates to GitHub Copilot interaction data usage policy

github.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 193 posts

Re: Updates to GitHub Copilot interaction data usage policy

#171

Post by adi_kurian »

latand6 wrote: post #150
danelski wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's akin to being grateful for your local shop owner that they allowed you to sweep the floor for other customers.

Please don’t strawman me, I asked completely different question. It’s not about being grateful or something, but that many people (devs) are too concerned about their code being stolen as if they’ve come up with something unique and the LLMs are some kind of database (which it isn’t). At the end of the day we’re going to be using AI to write all the code, many of us already doing that. And if some GitHub copilot mode…

People would have a different response if they did not, in my view accurately, perceive that wool is being pulled over their eyes.

Re: Updates to GitHub Copilot interaction data usage policy

#172

Post by Rapzid »

NewJazz wrote: post #89
Rapzid wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that not some stock feature-flag verbiage?

But it isn't a feature, so using a feature flag is a bit weird.

How is it not a feature from a development standpoint? Colloquially any bit of intended functionality qualifies as a "feature" and certainly any functionality you conditionally enable/disable would be controlled by a "feature flag" regardless.

Re: Updates to GitHub Copilot interaction data usage policy

#173

Post by NewJazz »

Rapzid wrote: post #172
NewJazz wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it isn't a feature, so using a feature flag is a bit weird.

How is it not a feature from a development standpoint? Colloquially any bit of intended functionality qualifies as a "feature" and certainly any functionality you conditionally enable/disable would be controlled by a "feature flag" regardless.

Because the user sees no difference in experience.

Re: Updates to GitHub Copilot interaction data usage policy

#174

Post by 1718627440 »

ThrowawayB7 wrote: post #165
pred_ wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you be able to comment on https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47522876 , i.e. explain the legal basis for this change for EU based users? If there is none, you may have to expect that people will exercise their right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority.

Why would you expect an engineer to be able to comment on legal affairs? Presumably it was cleared with Microsoft's legal department or whatever GitHub's divisional equivalent is.

That's precisely what the term 'engineer' signifies. (I know it gets used incorrectly for software developers.) Workers in general need to decide whether something is legal independently of their company, because the company lawyers have the interest of the company in mind, which might conflict with the workers interest to not do illegal things.

Big Tech is known for clearing illegal things by their legal departments all the time.

Re: Updates to GitHub Copilot interaction data usage policy

#176

Post by edelbitter »

rennokki wrote: post #156
pred_ wrote: post #58

What is the legal basis of this in the EU? Ignoring the fact they could end up stealing IP, it seems like the collected information could easily contain PII, and consent would have to be > freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous. In order to obtain freely given consent, it must be given on a voluntary basis.

It breaks GDPR easily: GDPR enforces you to comply with opt-out by default, no workaround by prefilling before hitting submit. While some think this applies only to personal data, then yes. But it takes only one line of code to use my phone number for testing while I test locally a register form in the application I'm developing. Once it gets sent to Copilot I can threaten with legal action if they are not taking it…

Has there ever been a GDPR fine that actually exhausted all applicable legal challenges within a sufficiently short delay from initial violation to actually matter?

Re: Updates to GitHub Copilot interaction data usage policy

#177

Post by apublicfrog »

gentleman11 wrote: post #81
dormento wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aka "they have lawyers and you usually don't, so we think we can get away with it."

only big companies have access to the legal system. nobody else can afford it

Most of the world aren't American and we can afford our legal systems ;).

Re: Updates to GitHub Copilot interaction data usage policy

#178

Post by solaire_oa »

stavros wrote: post #122
nulld3v wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly, this issue is systemic: https://github.com/openai/codex/issues/2847

OpenCode has a plugin that lets you add an .ignore file (though I think .agentignore would be better). The problem is that, even though the plugin makes it so the agent can't directly read the file, there's no guarantee the agent will try to be helpful and do something like "well I can't read .envrc using my read tool, so let me cat .envrc and read it that way".

This points out that agentic security flaws are worse than "systemic", they're the feature. Agents are literal backdoors.

It's so bizarre to be discussing minor security concerns of backdoors, like trying to block env vars. Of course the maintainers don't care about blocking env vars. It's security theater.

Post reply on HN