Live data from Hacker News

Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

kite.com

531–540 of 547 posts

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a product that I actually _would_ pay for as an individual. It's reasonably priced and worth the increase in efficiency and better experience. Plus their pricing is fair and flexible.

Yes, it seems fair to me to spend real money on Jetbrain's tools, if you like them. It is strange how reluctant programmers are to spend on tools even though they are, as a rule, quite willing to let themselves be paid handsomely for their services. Yet graphic designers pay for Adobe's tools. Who can read this riddle?

I am glad to pay for software, but I want it to be free as in freedom: I insist on being able to modify, fix, extend and share it. So all of my tools I rely on are AGPL, GPL or BSD-licensed.

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#532
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience with copilot has been very different. It easily pays for itself, and getting my employer (seed stage startup) to spring for it for the entire team was an easy sell. Yeah it's pretty dumb most of the time. But I know that, and I don't use code from it without carefully checking it out and modifying it. But it's still a huge help. Just the time saved writing tests alone pays for it. And I've had a few spo…

> If my company didn't pay for it, I would Testimonials of this form are near worthless to a company. Maybe it's true for you. Statistically, it's highly likely to be misleading. People overestimate their willingness to pay for something for a number of reasons, but one of the biggest is that they incorrectly visualise what the choice to pay or not looks like. They often imagine a moment of abstract choice after whic…

It's my personal anecdote, I make no claims that other people feel the same way. If they were logical, they should though. Paying $10 to get several hundred dollars in productivity gains is a no-brainer. It's the same reason I pay for a second monitor, a properly comfortable chair and desk, a top end computer, and JetBrains. At software engineer salaries, even small productivity improvements pay off handsomely.

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#533
post #453
post #235

> Our diagnosis is that individual developers do not pay for tools. I know this first hand, building a developer tool startup and failing to reach any level of revenue. In the end, the tech was bought out by a larger company to recover a fraction of our VC investment. The challenge is that when you're building software for developers, they already know how it must work. It's like trying to sell magic tricks to magici…

> towards non-technical folks trying to get their feet wet in software. Eg: Data scientists or business. A bit tangential to the original post, but where does this belief that data scientists are non-technical folks? I am a data scientist myself, and in my view it's way more technical than most software development. Albeit I wouldn't still call neither data scientists nor software engineers "smarter" than the average…

I work at a firm with many data scientists (I am one of them -- though my title has wavered back and forth between data scientist and ML engineer). Whether or not data scientists are "technical" and in what sense could be a difficult question to answer.

I can't speak very broadly, but at least for my company most data scientists are not doing the kind of work you describe. There certainly are some folks constructing and training complex machine learning models, but I think the majority work on the level of more basic statistical models and rules of thumb, where a project's final output might be a dashboard or presentation. Arguably some might refer to this as data analysis rather than data science, but none of these terms are particularly well defined.

That's not to say they aren't technical in some sense. All of them can and do code to one degree or another (with perhaps the exception of a small number of people who've been in the industry for decades), though not all of them do so with high proficiency or attention to software engineering best practices. That also goes for some of the engineers where I work, admittedly.

All in all, the broad level of technical aptitude has grown over the past few years. But not everyone with the title of data scientist is a machine learning specialist, nor are they necessarily skilled at software engineering.

Edit: As for Copilot, I found it worse than useless. It miserably failed every test I threw at it, from machine learning to (especially) Spark data pipelines, only redeeming itself with a string handling problem -- for which the solution was still entirely wrong but at least interestingly wrong. I frankly don't see how anyone pays for it, though perhaps it's better for projects with a ton of boilerplate.

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#534
post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If my company didn't pay for it, I would Testimonials of this form are near worthless to a company. Maybe it's true for you. Statistically, it's highly likely to be misleading. People overestimate their willingness to pay for something for a number of reasons, but one of the biggest is that they incorrectly visualise what the choice to pay or not looks like. They often imagine a moment of abstract choice after whic…

It's my personal anecdote, I make no claims that other people feel the same way. If they were logical, they should though. Paying $10 to get several hundred dollars in productivity gains is a no-brainer. It's the same reason I pay for a second monitor, a properly comfortable chair and desk, a top end computer, and JetBrains. At software engineer salaries, even small productivity improvements pay off handsomely.

I don't know about software engineering more generally, but I found it worse than useless for my work in data science (machine learning and ETL pipelines), spitting out code that was so wrong that it couldn't be salvaged. I suspect there's a wide variance in the degree to which Copilot will indeed pay for itself.

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the price goes down every year you renew for like four years I think? By year 4 you’re getting the all products pack for like $150/ year

Yeah, I jumped in when they first did subs back in 2015 (IIRC). Nowadays, the charge seems pretty trivial for what you get, though I think they may have just raised it on me a little to closer to $175. I also jumped into a personal O'Reilly Safari subscription way back when the price wasn't as high as it is now, and I've kept that grandfathered subscription up as well. I think between the two, it ends up being a bit…

Smart.

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#536
post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m a web developer. My company pays for JetBrains IntelliJ for me. And I love it. But, if I had to pay for it out of my own pocket, I’d use VS Code instead. I’ve used both and IntelliJ is superior to VS Code, but not to such an extent that I would pay my own money for it. But I’m more than happy to have my company buy it for me.

JetBrains IDE's is the most notable exception of dev tools I personally pay for, insane value and productivity makes it a no-brainer purchase given its instant ROI from time saved. Life's too short to not maximize your productivity for a few $'s.

I’m coming to feel this way about github copilot, especially as a solo dev right now. Is it perfect? No. But it works often and spits out code that’s a good enough template or good enough, and is something i’d likely find on stackoverflow anyway. It’s kind of like I’m reviewing a junior/mid dev’s code and almost like I have a second person working with me which I find very valuable.

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The weird thing is that 13% seems high. It is hard to imagine they are less than 13% more efficient with those tools. It is weird that software engineers are the only engineer-types that are supposed to be able to do their job with just a computer and a built-in editor.

Software development is the only field I can think of where the making of the tools of the trade is wholly encapsulated by the field itself. Maybe blacksmithing. In such an environment, it makes sense. We make our own tools, and for the most part the most powerful of those tools end up being given away for free. To other people who both use the tools, and have the capacity to improve them. Who then give them away for…

Woodworkers make many of their own tools.

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#538

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The weird thing is that 13% seems high. It is hard to imagine they are less than 13% more efficient with those tools. It is weird that software engineers are the only engineer-types that are supposed to be able to do their job with just a computer and a built-in editor.

> It is weird that software engineers are the only engineer-types that are supposed to be able to do their job with just a computer and a built-in editor. Not really. We aren't actually engineers. Someone appropriated the title and misused it, and now there's no putting that genie back in the bottle.

I would have agreed with you 20 years ago. Now, the cloud architecture stuff is real engineering.

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

APIs are not copyrightable (Oracle vs Google). However, the code that interacts with an API might be. Regardless, it is interesting to think about what domains are easier to generate effective models for. I would expect it to be easier to generate a supervised model => . My intuition is also, that it is easier to generate React component code, and harder to generate feature code.

Unfortunately that ruling was overturned and APIs were found to be copyrightable: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_LLC_v._Oracle_America,_...

Which was later overturned by the Supreme Court if you read farther down the article you posted the link for.

And was all over the tech news at the time.

I kind of suspect you are intentionally trolling…

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just the time saved writing tests alone pays for it. This, so much. My code since using Copilot is easily ten times better tested than it was before, and I wasn't especially lazy when it comes to testing. Given 1-2 hand-written unit tests, Copilot can start filling in test bodies that correctly test what's described in the function name. When I can't think of any more edge cases, I'll go prompt it with one more @Te…

> which means copilot is generating tests that only interact with an API that I wrote It bases this generated test cases on other similar test cases in other software, including GPL licensed

Which doesn’t matter unless you are distributing said test cases.
Post reply on HN