GitHub Copilot available for JetBrains and Neovim

Post by sodality2 » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 12:00 AM UTC

rectang wrote: post #133

meetups323 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. Copilot users are inserting "ticking time-bombs" into their own codebases. The buck stops with the user, when they use code from any source at all , whether it's their head, the internet, some internal library, lecture notes, a coworker, a random dude of the street, or who knows what else, it their own responsibility to ensure the code they're using has been released under a license they can use. They don't get…

We agree that downstream users who redistribute copyrighted code regurgitated by Copilot are in violation of copyright. It doesn't seem to me as though the distinction between "Copilot reproduced the code and the engineer copy/pasted/saved it" versus "Copilot inserted the code" is crucial. There's a separate question about Microsoft's own liability. When Copilot reproduces open source code without adhering to the ter…

Post by esjeon » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 12:01 AM UTC

thamer wrote: post #222

e0a74c wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised no one has suggested using `requests` considering how easy, safe and readable it is: >>> import requests, pprint >>> >>> >>> url = "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php" >>> resp = requests.get( ... url, ... params=dict( ... action="query", ... list="geosearch", ... format="json", ... gsradius=10000, ... gscoord=f"{latitude.value}|{longitude.value}" ... ) ... ) >>> >>> pprint.pprint(resp.json()) {'batchco…

For what it's worth, Copilot can do it. I typed the following prompt: def search_wikipedia(lat, lon): """ use "requests" to do a geosearch on Wikipedia and pretty-print the resulting JSON """ And it completed it with: r = requests.get('https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=geosearch&gsradius=10000&gscoord={0}|{1}&gslimit=20&format=json'.format(lat, lon)) pprint.pprint(r.json())

Post by rectang » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 12:04 AM UTC

sodality2 wrote: post #262

rectang wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We agree that downstream users who redistribute copyrighted code regurgitated by Copilot are in violation of copyright. It doesn't seem to me as though the distinction between "Copilot reproduced the code and the engineer copy/pasted/saved it" versus "Copilot inserted the code" is crucial. There's a separate question about Microsoft's own liability. When Copilot reproduces open source code without adhering to the ter…

>It doesn't seem to me as though the distinction between "Copilot reproduced the code and the engineer copy/pasted/saved it" versus "Copilot inserted the code" is crucial. Is Google responsible when they index licensed code, then others steal it? It's surely the liability of the programmer to "check" (Not really sure how this would work, either).

Post by syngrog66 » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 12:07 AM UTC

Post by nfRfqX5n » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 12:12 AM UTC

mewse wrote: post #213

I’ve never understood the value proposition for Copilot. In terms of difficulty, writing code is maybe on average a two out of ten. On average, maintaining code you wrote recently is probably a three out of ten in terms of difficulty, and maintaining code somebody else wrote or code from a long time ago probably rises to around a five out of ten. Debugging misbehaving code is probably a seven out of ten or higher. Gi…