301–310 of 346 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you use copilot?
First response: It doesn't matter if I use copilot right now . It matters if I will ever use copilot in the future. Opting-out is future-focused. What if I said "no, I don't use copilot, so I don't need to opt out", then a year from now start using copilot, completely forgetting about this whole debacle? That's the evil of opt-out. My inaction only benefits them, never me. Second response: Maybe? I press the little b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you use copilot?
Do we get a choice? I did not ever explicitly enable it yet GitHub's web UI by default uses copilot to autofill my web-based edit commit messages. It also shows up on the home screen by default now. I'm pretty sure if you use the site you're using GitHub Copilot in some way, so your question becomes irrelevant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably don't reward extortion with money.
You don't have to use their free service if you don't like its terms. "Extortion" is a bit of an exaggeration here. Yes, I know, it's dicey when people get used to a nice, friendly platform, and the platform gains lots of users, and then at some point (or several points), the terms start getting worse, and people feel misled and betrayed. I get that. But this is a corporation. Hell, this is Microsoft . It's hilarious…
Obviously the root problem is the incentive structures created by a system that relies on scarcity to assign value to things being applied to things that effectively cost zero to duplicate. Obviously companies are not my friends, I self host everything, heck I even have a local copy of my VPS, it's on solar, I'M fine. I don't expect Github to do good things and make good choices, but that doesn't mean I can't be mad about it when they do things I don't like. Also I live in the real world and have to deal with society and there would be friction I create for myself when I try to exist in tech and refuse to use github, might be a worthwhile trade but it IS a trade.
While I understand the network effect of github for public project, I don't really understand why one would want to use it for private repos. There are tons of git providers including free ones that include full gitlab/gitea/forgejo to get similar features to github and there is nothing more easy to self host or host on a vps with near zero maintenance.
You wouldn't believe the amount of people that would list Github, but not git, as a skill.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Again, this collects usage data. If you click the button by accident and don’t interact, they get no data.
So? This feature is available to everyone and you have zero idea how many people actually use it. If I go to one of your GPL projects and I ask a simple question to find out what this project is about, you will be perfectly "ok" that this interaction (that includes most of the code that is required to answer my dumb the question) will be used for training? This is not ok.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every Git commit is likely to contain personal data, in the form of the author’s name and email address usually present in a commit’s metadata. Furthermore, unless GitHub is prohibiting users from submitting personal data via their ToS (which, given the above, would be impractical), the only thing that matters is whether the data in fact contains personal data or not. GitHub cannot just assume that it doesn’t. And pr…
Since commits aren't code, that's no problem. The idea that because any piece of code could possibly contain some personal data -- while 99.99% of it doesn't -- that therefore the entirety is PD is not supported by the gdpr. You could as well say any text field anywhere can hypothetically have someone type their name and is thus personal data as well.
Personal data is about identifying a person and relating information to that person. A name in an unrelated text field isn’t personal data if you can’t tell the relation between the name and the person who input it, or any surrounding data. The contents of a repository, however, and the interaction with Copilot, can very well help identifying the account holder and their personal data. For example, I might be processing personal health data identifiable as such in a private repository with the help of Copilot.
[dupe] Discussion on source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47521799
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're right, of course, and I find it frustrating that people are so thick as to not see your claim as obvious. Stallman is always right.
Back in 2003 he was advocating for legalization of child sexual abuse material. In 2006 he said he was skeptical of the harm caused by “voluntary pedophilia”, a statement that presupposes that children can consent to sex with adults. So I dunno bout that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the sarcasm indicator is useful especially for some neurodivergent folks who may not pick up on social cues well. And the sacram indicator does not in any way detract from the joke.
Yeah it does. If you have to explain the joke, it makes it not funny. In the real world, people don't have explicit sarcasm markers, you have up deduce it. As a neurodivergent person, I reflexively downvote on /s because coddling people isn't going to help them grow or deal with the real world.
On the internet it is very possible and often plausible that someone can very much believe what may appear to a reasonable person to be sarcasm. Having a crutch online does not equate to an equivalent crutch offline.
Anecdotally, neurodivergent folks I know prefer, and some even require, a sarcasm indicator online.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And on users that don’t even use github, other than the required account to use CoPilot in Visual Studio.
Exactly. This affects anyone using VS Code or Copilot with proprietary data, including all the users automating workflows through the Copilot SDK and the like. A perfect storm. Did anyone from GitHub's legal team actually authorise this, or did they use Copilot to sign off on it?