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

381–386 of 386 posts

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

#381

Post by bitfilped »

quantummagic wrote: post #352
alsetmusic wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stupid people think that because they're making a good living under capitalism (many on HN), it's a good system. All the ads on websites and shitty bosses and vendor lock-in and declining support options are "accidents" that would get better if "companies stopped being evil." No. It incentivizes evil. Capitalism is the reason the internet sucks. If you don't agree, think about it longer and consider if it might actua…

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.

No, publicly funded research is the reason the internet exists.

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

#382

Post by monooso »

account42 wrote: post #359
monooso wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe capitalism is defined by private ownership (not necessarily by investors) of the means of production.

Cool, but how is this theoretical fact relevant to the real world.

I was responding to GP, who stated "capitalism means ownership by investors", and then used that definition to make the argument that "it is the investors who ruin your product."

So in this context, the "theoretical fact" as you put it, is relevant.

More generally, I would argue that such things are relevant because we're all using words to communicate, and it helps a great deal if we all understand what those words and phrases actually mean.

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

#383

Post by paulf38 »

ahartmetz wrote: post #201
jeltz wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was much better than the closed source SourceForge which existed before it. A lot of small projects dont have the energy to self host. Plus for small projects the barrier of entry is an issue. I recently found a typo in an error message in Garage but since they run their own Forgejo instance and OpenID never really became a thing I never created a PR. It is first now with Codeberg there is a credible alternative.…

Well - my perspective is the KDE project, which has a team of capable admins who take care of hosting. The project has always been more or less self-hosted (I remember SUSE providing servers) and even provided hosting for at least one barely associated project, Valgrind. I think Valgrind bugs are still on KDE Bugzilla. It's admittedly not really practical for most projects, but it could be for some large ones - Rust,…

We still use KDE's bugzilla. One of the reasons that Vagrind was initially developed was to help with KDE back when many developers didn't really understand how to use new and delete.

These days sourceware.org hosts the Valgrind git repo, buildbot CI and web site. We could also use their bugzilla. There isn't much point migrating as long as KDE can put up with us.

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

#384

Post by philipov »

monooso wrote: post #382
account42 wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cool, but how is this theoretical fact relevant to the real world.

I was responding to GP, who stated "capitalism means ownership by investors", and then used that definition to make the argument that "it is the investors who ruin your product." So in this context, the "theoretical fact" as you put it, is relevant. More generally, I would argue that such things are relevant because we're all using words to communicate, and it helps a great deal if we all understand what those words…

I was talking about Actually Existing Capitalism, not hypothetical scenarios that don't obtain in the world we're subjected to. It is a diagnosis, not a theoretical law of nature.

When it comes to communicating, the meaning of a word is how it is used in practice. Use creates meaning. In practice, capitalism means ownership by investors. In the world that exists, the Capitalist Class is the Investor Class, and the dynamics created by this reality have caused non-hypothetical products to be ruined time and again.

Proprietorships and partnerships where the management is also the owner(s) are an older economic system that predates the innovations of modern capitalism. Even businesses that begin this way commonly seek investment capital, get bought out or go public. The ones that don't are considered stable and therefore uninteresting, such as lawyers, but private equity will eventually gobble them up too.

If you look at the products that have avoided enshitification, they are the ones that have avoided or subjugated investors.

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

#385

Post by Aachen »

account42 wrote: post #375
Aachen wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. It's so far out there that I have to wonder if it's a rogue employee who thought this a good excuse to cause reputational damage without it being too obvious. Doesn't pass several razors though (not the simplest explanation; malice involved.. is that Hanlon's and Occam's razor?), so I don't truly believe it... but it would be possible

Occam's razor is about the simplest solution often being the correct one. Hanlon's razor is about not assuming malice, which makes no sense when applied to faceless mega-corporations or even random strangers where you know conflicting motives exist.

Thanks for confirming I remembered the razor names correctly!

I still don't assume malice, at least as a default / until strongly indicated otherwise, from any individual employee. Emergent behavior of complex artificial incentive systems is, of course, a whole other matter so I can see what you mean that the razor won't apply there without breaking it down to an individual as in the scenario I mentioned about an ill-meaning employee

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

#386

Post by port11 »

Animats wrote: post #3

Microsoft will probably try to sneak it back in later. They've done that with other intrusions. Migrating away from Github just increased in priority.

It was a “bad judgement call” this time because people noticed and complained. Next time it will be the right judgement call. Ach.
Post reply on HN