471–480 of 806 posts
This exact code can be found 1000 times on github and many of those are MIT licensed https://github.com/search?q=%22cs+*cs_transpose+%28%22&type=... . Copilot, or any other developer or person, has no way of knowing where the original implementation came from or it's original license. The cat is out of the bag, get used to it.
Howdy, folks. Ryan here from the GitHub Copilot product team. I don’t know how the original poster’s machine was set-up, but I’m gonna throw out a few theories about what could be happening. If similar code is open in your VS Code project, Copilot can draw context from those adjacent files. This can make it appear that the public model was trained on your private code, when in fact the context is drawn from local fil…
They were highly skilled laborers who knew how to operate complex looms. When auto looms came along, factory owners decided they didn't want highly trained, knowledgeable workers they wanted highly disposable workers. The Luddites were happy to operate the new looms, they just wanted to realize some of the profit from the savings in labor along with the factory owners. When the factory owners said no, the Luddites smashed the new looms.
Genuinely, and I'm not trying to ask this with any snark, do you view the work you do as similar to the manufacturers of the auto looms? The opportunity to reduce labor but also further the strength of the owner vs the worker? I could see arguments being made both ways and I'm curious about how your thoughts fall.
Howdy, folks. Ryan here from the GitHub Copilot product team. I don’t know how the original poster’s machine was set-up, but I’m gonna throw out a few theories about what could be happening. If similar code is open in your VS Code project, Copilot can draw context from those adjacent files. This can make it appear that the public model was trained on your private code, when in fact the context is drawn from local fil…
Thank you for your input.
I'd like you to inspect the issue and explain what happened and why (and start to fix that if that's not intended) rather than sharing what you think could have happened.
Unless you're not in position to do that, in which case it doesn't matter you're on the Copilot team (anyone can throw hypotheses like that).
Please also don't tell me we're at the point where we can't tell why AI works in a particular way and we cannot debug issues like this :-(
Same issue with Stable Diffusion/NovelAI and certain people's artwork (eg Greg Rutkowski) being obviously used as part of the training set. More noticeable in Copilot since the output needs to be a lot more precise. Lawmakers need to jump on this stuff ASAP. Some say that it's no different from a person looking at existing code or art and recreating it from memory or using it as inspiration. But the law changes when…
Suppose we trained the open AI model on the entire corpus of pop hits from about 1960 onwards.
What are the chances it would get sued for copyright infringement.
If the derivative nature is clear in the same model being trained on popular song, then it should be the same for code (or visual art, or a number of other domains).
Not arguing for current copyright law, just pointing out the inconsistencies.
For that matter, what would happen if you asked Copilot for a set of Java headers. Asking for a friend!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We built a filter to help detect and suppress the rare instances where a GitHub Copilot suggestion contains code that matches public code on GitHub. You have the choice to turn that filter on or off during setup. With the filter on, GitHub Copilot checks code suggestions with its surrounding code for matches or near matches (ignoring whitespace) against public code on GitHub of about 150 characters. If there is a m…
That is for people using Copilot. I’d like a setting that tells GitHub to not scan my code at all. And I am curious about that sneaking into the terms in between me signing up and paying and them taking code for free. I have also never heard of “public code” being used in that way.
What about people forking/mirroring your code? Or people merely contributing code? There is no one-to-one correspondence between copyright holders and Github users.
Copilot should just comply with the license, that's it.
This exact code can be found 1000 times on github and many of those are MIT licensed https://github.com/search?q=%22cs+*cs_transpose+%28%22&type=... . Copilot, or any other developer or person, has no way of knowing where the original implementation came from or it's original license. The cat is out of the bag, get used to it.
Or just don't use Github.
This exact code can be found 1000 times on github and many of those are MIT licensed https://github.com/search?q=%22cs+*cs_transpose+%28%22&type=... . Copilot, or any other developer or person, has no way of knowing where the original implementation came from or it's original license. The cat is out of the bag, get used to it.
The copyright infringement might not matter if code from individual developers is being used - they usually don't sue. But once this happens to say Oracle's copyrighted code... Well, that is going to be interesting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or just don't use Github.
Not using Github doesn't stop others from posting your code on Github with incorrect licenses. It becomes a massive game of whack-a-repo
Takes practice, but it's a skill that can be mastered like any other.
This exact code can be found 1000 times on github and many of those are MIT licensed https://github.com/search?q=%22cs+*cs_transpose+%28%22&type=... . Copilot, or any other developer or person, has no way of knowing where the original implementation came from or it's original license. The cat is out of the bag, get used to it.