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

GitHub backs down, kills Copilot pull-request ads after backlash

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 386 posts

Re: GitHub backs down, kills Copilot pull-request ads after backlash

#361

Post by latexr »

3yr-i-frew-up wrote: post #246
latexr wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> sorry about the tangent I understand why you felt the need to do it, but it’s still sad that you have to apologise for it. It’s not like if using technology for killing is a fringe hypothesis, it’s happening right now and on the news. It’s a discussion worth having. > This really is the quote of the century I loathe that quote. The people thinking about how to make others click ads are only concerned with themselve…

>A “best mind” should be capable of empathy and have a broad societal view of consequences for their actions. 9 years of philosophy later: You are not a best mind. Sorry. But you think morals metaphysically exist and no best minds do.

I find it fascinating how you can read someone’s own definition of a subjective concept and immediately make wrong assertions about them and their opinions and do so by employing a No True Scotsman, a logical fallacy so basic one learns it in high school introductory class.

Re: GitHub backs down, kills Copilot pull-request ads after backlash

#362

Post by latexr »

Gigachad wrote: post #179
yosamino wrote: post #4

Calling advertisements "product tips" as if everybody is too stupid to understand what that means. They created an amazing technology that oftentimes is indistinguishable from magic and then use it to deliver ads and - sorry about the tangent - kill people. This really is the quote of the century: > The best minds of my generation are thinking about how to make people click ads What a waste.

These people could invent actual AGI, and the only thing they could think to do with it is push ads.

That’s almost literal. Sam Altman has admitted early on their goal was to invent AGI and then ask it how to make money.

https://www.startupbell.net/post/sam-altman-told-investors-b...

Re: GitHub backs down, kills Copilot pull-request ads after backlash

#363

Post by account42 »

aleph_minus_one wrote: post #141
yosamino wrote: post #4

Calling advertisements "product tips" as if everybody is too stupid to understand what that means. They created an amazing technology that oftentimes is indistinguishable from magic and then use it to deliver ads and - sorry about the tangent - kill people. This really is the quote of the century: > The best minds of my generation are thinking about how to make people click ads What a waste.

> > The best minds of my generation are thinking about how to make people click ads > What a waste. If you consider "what people (un-coercedly) spend money on" as "what people actually want", the situation gets obvious: People don't voluntarily spend money so that e.g. deep scientific questions are worked on or other things are done that are often claimed that "smart people should do". (by the way: a lot of problems…

It just so happens that pure unchecked capitalism isn't the only way to organize our society.

Re: GitHub backs down, kills Copilot pull-request ads after backlash

#364

Post by account42 »

esseph wrote: post #111
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People buy things because of ads all the time. Probably you've done it too. I go out of my way not to buy products advertised to me, but I've definitely fallen to the incessant brain-washing of brand advertising. Probably regular advertising too depending what you include as adverts. I was surprised speaking to someone the other day, just out and about. They'd purposefully gone out to buy doughnuts they'd seen advert…

> I go out of my way not to buy products advertised to me The most likely way to get me to not buy your product is to advertise it to me.

I too deliberately avoid products from ads, especially ones that annoy me. But I'm under no illusion that ads never work on me, "there's no bad publicity" and all. It takes active effort to avoid defaulting to the options you have already been told about and sometimes you're going to slip up. And since about every company advertises it's not like you really have any other option.

Re: GitHub backs down, kills Copilot pull-request ads after backlash

#365

Post by account42 »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #288
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People buy things because of ads all the time. Probably you've done it too. I go out of my way not to buy products advertised to me, but I've definitely fallen to the incessant brain-washing of brand advertising. Probably regular advertising too depending what you include as adverts. I was surprised speaking to someone the other day, just out and about. They'd purposefully gone out to buy doughnuts they'd seen advert…

I have never once bought a product because of an ad, unless the ad was telling me about something I didn't know existed. Perhaps others are weak-minded enough to do so, but not everyone is.

How do you know? The point of most ads isn't just to get you to make an immediate purchase but to make that brand part of your active memory so you will be more predisposed to choose it when you see it available. There are some ads that don't even mention any specific product at all.

Re: GitHub backs down, kills Copilot pull-request ads after backlash

#366

Post by account42 »

_thisdot wrote: post #98
Razengan wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And nobody has ever bought anything just because of an ad. You either already knew about shit through some other way or you were going to buy it anyway. Only people downvoting this will be the ones who perpetuate this Emperor With No Clothes racket. It's just a thin veil for surveillance.

I have definitely bought things I’ve seen in ads. And I know many people who have. There are brands that I know exist only because I’ve seen ads for them. What is an alternative to advertisements that you suggest??

Why do we need an alternative?

Re: GitHub backs down, kills Copilot pull-request ads after backlash

#368

Post by account42 »

BLKNSLVR wrote: post #66
gorgoiler wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think the quote is particularly fair. You could just as easily see it as the best minds are building huge amounts of amazing, free technology and need a way to pay for it. For every microsecond level ad auction broker there’s a free Android update, cat video platform enhancement, calendar app feature, or type checked scripting language release. HFT on the other hand — now there’s a tech black hole! [edited to…

Hard disagree. It brought panhandling to where generosity once prevailed. It brought us social media engagement metrics and 140-character-limited 'interaction' and cluttered, flashing, distracting, human-psyche hacking interfaces. It brought all the c*nts who only saw dollar signs. Agree on HFT. (Disclaimer: I'm focusing on the negatives to make a point, there probably are some wild benefits, but I'm on the side of p…

People did share their cat pics before centralized ad supported platforms and I would definitely not see that centralization as a "benefit".

Re: GitHub backs down, kills Copilot pull-request ads after backlash

#369

Post by account42 »

gorgoiler wrote: post #87
imiric wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You could just as easily see it as the best minds are building huge amounts of amazing, free technology and need a way to pay for it. That's a false dichotomy. First of all, the technology is far from "free". It's easily accessible, perhaps, but users pay handsomely to use it, even if they're unaware of it, which most adtech companies go out of their way to ensure. Secondly, advertising isn't the only business mode…

It's hardly a black and white area, and there's more to this question than just GOOG, but there's a joke here that has some relevance: Those bastards have bled us dry with their algorithms, taken all the data we had, and not just from us, but from our children, our children's children, our children's children's children, our children's children's children's children... and what have they ever given us in return? The…

I would not agree that Android has been a net positive for society at all. And neither as Chrome.

Re: GitHub backs down, kills Copilot pull-request ads after backlash

#370

Post by alsetmusic »

account42 wrote: post #357
quantummagic wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Capitalism is the reason the Internet exists. Instead of just complaining, why don't you recommend an alternative. One that hasn't starved and murdered millions of people, such as communism. It's childish to denounce an entire system, with no bloody idea at all about what to do instead, except idealistic utopian dreams... like we'll all just get along and prosper, if only capitalism didn't exist.

The Internet was initially developed for the military and then extended for academic use. Capitalism wasn't needed to create it. And neither does "not the capitalism we have in the west today" equal to "soviet communism" - it's neither a binary distinction nor is it a one dimensional spectrum.

It wouldn't have become the internet of today without capitalism. The government / military certainly didn't finance everything that happened after it was created.
Post reply on HN