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

Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 315 posts

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#181

Post by daveguy »

danny_codes wrote: post #173
agilob wrote: post #163

For me Copilot keeps commenting something like "this changes typo in a documentation". The comment is now blocking automerge of the PR, so I have more work. I have to go to the PR and mark the comment as resolved. Thanks AI, thanks Microsoft, fantastic job burning electricity for this. At least Bitcoin created some value ;)

lol bitcoin has not created any value. Well it has if you are a scammer or drug dealer I suppose.

Just wait until people realize how little value Bitcoin has when people rush to the exits. Limited number of transactions, limited utility for the average person. We haven't had runs on banks in a long time in the US because of regulation. Crypto is a wild west. There will eventually be a Bitcoin exit trigger event and it will be brutal.

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#182

Post by globular-toast »

hannob wrote: post #165
acomjean wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I remember initially GitHub (before MS) was free for open source and pay for everyone else. It wasn’t an entirely new idea (source forge?) but it use git which was rising in popularity. I think GitHub added the “pull request” as a really useful add on to git and that really made it take off. Oddly I used selfhosted git at an academic institution. I liked it because it was set up to use “hooks” https://git-scm.com/…

> I think GitHub added the “pull request” as a really useful add on to git and that really made it take off. I'm pretty sure the term "pull request" existed before GitHub. (Meaning writing an email saying "I have changes in my copy of repo that I want you to merge into the main repo".) But GitHub put an UI around it, and they may've been the first to do that.

Can confirm. Pull request is something Linus talks about in the early days of git before he even acknowledged the existence of GitHub.

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#183

Post by hyperpape »

bgwalter wrote: post #135
hyperpape wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From Dan Luu ( https://danluu.com/wat/ ): > When I joined this company, my team didn't use version control for months and it was a real fight to get everyone to use version control. Although I won that fight, I lost the fight to get people to run a build, let alone run tests, before checking in, so the build is broken multiple times per day. When I mentioned that I thought this was a problem for our productivity, I w…

Version control has quickly won. It was so popular that people kept writing new systems all the time. CI was popular. Most major open source projects had their own CI systems before GitHub. "AI" on the other hand is shoved down people's throats by management and by those who profit from in in some way. There is nothing organic about it.

Version control is almost 50 years old. It has very slowly won.

AI adoption is, for better or worse, voluntarily or not, very fast compared to other technologies.

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#184

Post by globular-toast »

acomjean wrote: post #38
ants_everywhere wrote: post #6

People have been voluntarily letting Microsoft host their code for years now. And before that they posted their open source code to a centralized site that wasn't open source. This is one of those things where of course it was going to happen. GitHub was VC funded, they were going to either exit to a big company or try to become one. Eventually the bill was going to come due and everyone knew this. You can choose to…

If I remember initially GitHub (before MS) was free for open source and pay for everyone else. It wasn’t an entirely new idea (source forge?) but it use git which was rising in popularity. I think GitHub added the “pull request” as a really useful add on to git and that really made it take off. Oddly I used selfhosted git at an academic institution. I liked it because it was set up to use “hooks” https://git-scm.com/…

> I think GitHub added the “pull request” as a really useful add on to git and that really made it take off.

Negative. The only thing GitHub added to the parlance is "forks" which are essentially like namespaced branches in the same repo.

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#185

Post by goku12 »

chickenpotpie wrote: post #125
AlexandrB wrote: post #44

I find it weird how companies talk out both sides of their mouth on AI. On the one hand it's this magical tool that will make you 10x more efficient at your job, and on the other it's something they have to market heavily and shove in your face at every turn - sometimes outright forcing you to engage with it. These two things don't seem compatible - if the tool was that good people would be beating down their doors t…

When the shopping cart was first introduced to grocery stores, nobody wanted to use it. People preferred to continue lugging around heavy baskets rather than push a cart. Actors had to be hired to walk around the stores pushing them around to convince people it normal and valuable to use them. Sometimes people are resistant to use things that improve their life and have to be convinced to work in their own self inter…

There are places around the world where shopping carts were introduced successfully without the accompanying actors to convince the customers to use it. The actual criteria must be whether the new addition boosts or hampers the customers' productivity, at least in the long run.

When I first heard about git, I knew that it would be very useful in the future, even if I had to spend some time and effort in mastering it. Same with CI, project planners, release engineering, etc. Nobody had to convince me to use them. But AI just doesn't belong to that category, at least in my experience. It misses results that a simple web/site search reveals. And it makes mistakes or outright hallucinates in ways even junior developers don't. It's in an uncanny valley between the classic non-AI services and plain old manual effort with disadvantages of both and advantages of neither. Again, others may not agree with this experience. But it's definitely not unique to me. The net gain/loss that AI brings to this field is not clear. At least not yet.

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#186

Post by ch4s3 »

andrepd wrote: post #153
bookofjoe wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple car project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_car_project >From 2014 until 2024, Apple undertook a research and development effort to develop an electric and self-driving car,[1] codenamed "Project Titan".[2][3] Apple never openly discussed any of its automotive research,[4] but around 5,000 employees were reported to be working on the project as of 2018.[5] In May 2018, Apple reportedly partnered with Volksw…

[flagged]

Ahh yes, capitalists noteworthy haters of building trains. If you ignore the private companies that built the NYC subway system(s), all of US freight rail, and invented trains.

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#187

Post by anonymars »

crote wrote: post #68

I'm getting quite sick of how it is forced on you. It's not just yet-another useful feature, they are shoveling it into everything , and giving it the most prominent place possible. I don't want AI getting in the way on Github. I don't want an unremovable AI button in my Office 365 mail client. I don't want to get nagging AI popups every. single. time. I open the GCP console. A year or two I was ambivalent about AI,…

"Press alt-i to draft a message"

Fuck off and leave me alone you distracting piece of shit

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#188

Post by vluft »

garyfirestorm wrote: post #176
AlexandrB wrote: post #44

I find it weird how companies talk out both sides of their mouth on AI. On the one hand it's this magical tool that will make you 10x more efficient at your job, and on the other it's something they have to market heavily and shove in your face at every turn - sometimes outright forcing you to engage with it. These two things don't seem compatible - if the tool was that good people would be beating down their doors t…

I would like to point out that in certain scenarios people are not very smart. For eg. Many car enthusiasts who care about speed and 0-60 will still look down on EVs despite EVs being ridiculously fast and cheap to attain those metrics. 40k EV is faster than 150k Porsche. But these guys will never adopt it.

that's not mostly what car enthusiasts care about, especially somebody buying a 150k porsche; they care about handling and road feel and a fat pig of an EV will never match a lighter car (well set up) on that; you can't beat physics when you're slinging that much weight; even set up as well as can be, a 5000lb taycan doesn't come close to the handling feel of a 3250lb 911.

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#189

Post by jcgrillo »

j45 wrote: post #160
karlshea wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re still falling for it. They have a clear path to vision-only autonomy IN THE BAY AREA. Let’s see it work in Minnesota in the winter where you can’t see lane markings, everything is white, and the camera lenses immediately get covered with road salt spray.

For now. It's important to not confuse activity, with progress, with results. At the same time, it's important to not confuse or downplay results, with progress, with activity. There seems to be activity, progress, and results. It seems to be speeding up. I don't have any preference for or against Tesla. Just observing.

> For now.

What can incremental progress do to make a camera see through road salt deposited on its lens? I call bullshit. There isn't any incremental path because it's not physically possible. The photons are stopped by the salt. No amount of "AI" or what the fuck ever else will change this. There is no path towards "progress" here.

Re: Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features

#190

Post by bwfan123 »

tho2342o349423 wrote: post #51
AlexandrB wrote: post #44

I find it weird how companies talk out both sides of their mouth on AI. On the one hand it's this magical tool that will make you 10x more efficient at your job, and on the other it's something they have to market heavily and shove in your face at every turn - sometimes outright forcing you to engage with it. These two things don't seem compatible - if the tool was that good people would be beating down their doors t…

At this point, pretty much all of the US markets (and the USD) is hinging on "unlimited upside" promised by techbros and their magic AGIs & robots. They probably get orders from all the way up the food chain to keep the show going. Wonder what'll happen to JPY once the Yen-carry unwinds from this massive hype-cycle - will probably hit 70 JPY to the dollar! Currently Sony Bank in Japan offers USD time-deposits at 8% p…

I would say the same of the following:

1) crypto: raise funding, buy crypto as collateral, raise more funding with said collateral, rinse and repeat.

2) gpu datacenters: raise funding, buy gpus as collateral, raise more funding, buy more gpus, rinse and repeat.

3) zero day options: average folks want a daily lottery thrill. rinse and repeat.

All of the above are fed by fomo and to some extent hype, and ripe for a reckoning.

Post reply on HN