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

Copilot edited an ad into my PR

notes.zachmanson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 704 posts

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#651

Post by altairprime »

TheScaryOne wrote: post #636
rchaud wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Microsoft that was prosecuted for monopoly behaviour 25 years ago is definitely not the same Microsoft that owns: - Github - LinkedIn - Activision Blizzard - Xbox - Azure, Sharepoint and Teams w/Copilot embedded everywhere - major stake in OpenAI - a multibillion dollar ad product portfolio (LinkedIn ads, Bing Ads)

After being told to not integrate Internet Explorer into the OS, they changed the name to EDGE and did it anyway? With the added excuse that it now compromises most of the file explorer functionality, too?

No, Edge isn’t Internet Explorer; they coexist if necessary for enterprise and legal reasons :)

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#652

Post by altairprime »

buildbot wrote: post #272
delfinom wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should probably get a lawyer to send a C&D.

There’s like 100 comments blaming raycast, they should just sue for damages lol.

They should sue to have the ads removed from the texts they were inserted into, which is a vastly more difficult problem than simply paying some dollars.

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#653

Post by altairprime »

polski-g wrote: post #631
transcriptase wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but at least a dozen Microsoft employees went on a seemingly scripted blitz on X about how they’re ready to start listening to feedback and… * checks notes * Only have copilot shoehorned into most things instead of everything. And some shit about windows developers which isn’t exactly going to fix the glaring issues with the OS itself.

They literally broke 40yr standard keyboard layouts on laptops by replacing right alt buttons with their bullshit AI button. Are they going to fix hardware they've already sold? On every OEM?

No need; they could just patch Windows to add the UI to override Win-F26 or whatever their synthetic Fkey was (currently disallowed by their software!).

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#654

Post by simonw »

matt_kantor wrote: post #642
simonw wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've not seen any evidence that these were ads and not "tips". Ads implies someone was paying for them. Promoting internal product features is not the same thing - if it was then every piece of software that shows a tip would be an ad product, and would be regulated as such.

> Ads implies someone was paying for them. It doesn't to me. By my understanding of the term, Netflix can most definitely advertise Netflix shows on its own platform, a flyer that a barber hangs on a public bulletin board is an advertisement, and the Oscar Mayer Weinermobile is advertising hotdogs when it drives through my town. Do you not consider these things to be advertisements? I pretty much agree with what http…

I think this particular story is a very different scandal if it turns out GitHub were charging other companies money in exchange for having Copilot include promotions for their products in PRs as opposed to Copilot adding uncompensated usage "tips" to those PRs.

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#655

Post by GitPushOrigin »

burnte wrote: post #628
ChadNauseam wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't really make sense. So it's an ad for raycast? But raycast said they didn't know about it. To me the explanation makes perfect sense. "You can use this tool with raycast" seems like a very reasonable tip.

> That doesn't really make sense. So it's an ad for raycast? It's an ad for using CoPilot and for Raycast. > But raycast said they didn't know about it. If I buy a billboard that tells people to go eat at a nearby restaurant, that's ad regardless of whether or not the restaurant knows that I bought that ad. > To me the explanation makes perfect sense. "You can use this tool with raycast" seems like a very reasonable…

Anyone claiming this is just a tip is being disingenuous or is extremely naive. MS knows exactly what they're doing, this wasn't a charity offering. Now they're claiming it was a tip to save face.

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#656

Post by jdejean »

ChadNauseam wrote: post #544
burnte wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We've now disabled these tips in pull requests created by or touched by Copilot, so you won't see this happen again for future PRs. It's appreciated, but these weren't tips, these were ads. Tips are "Save time with keyboard shortcuts" or "Check out the latest features under 'Whats New' in the help menu!" When you name other products, that's an ad.

That doesn't really make sense. So it's an ad for raycast? But raycast said they didn't know about it. To me the explanation makes perfect sense. "You can use this tool with raycast" seems like a very reasonable tip.

Tips don’t include links to unassociated paid products. Call it a promotion if you prefer, it’s still an unsolicited funnel

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#657

Post by matt_kantor »

simonw wrote: post #654
matt_kantor wrote: post #642

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ads implies someone was paying for them. It doesn't to me. By my understanding of the term, Netflix can most definitely advertise Netflix shows on its own platform, a flyer that a barber hangs on a public bulletin board is an advertisement, and the Oscar Mayer Weinermobile is advertising hotdogs when it drives through my town. Do you not consider these things to be advertisements? I pretty much agree with what http…

I think this particular story is a very different scandal if it turns out GitHub were charging other companies money in exchange for having Copilot include promotions for their products in PRs as opposed to Copilot adding uncompensated usage "tips" to those PRs.

I agree with that.

Two things:

1. People using the word "advertisement" when commenting on this situation aren't necessarily saying that's what's happening, and they may find these tips/ads distasteful anyway (I know I do).

2. Even if someone isn't literally paying Microsoft to insert these tips/ads, promoting third parties which are themselves Microsoft customers still benefits Microsoft.

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#658

Post by rubyfan »

MereInterest wrote: post #576
rubyfan wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s like how Disney Plus “ad free” tier shows you ads for Hulu and Disney Perks. They probably redefine “ad” in their terms of service so their own ads are called something else.

I looked into it at one point, as I was disgusted by the unskippable advertisements when paying for an ad-free tier on one of the myriad streaming platforms. Apparently, they distinguish between "advertisements" for a product or service and "promotions" for themselves. I get why that would be a reasonable internal distinction, as the former would require sign-off from the business paying for the advertisement, while…

The distinction is likely a claw back to give themselves just that ability to freely advertise to you after telling you it was ad free. Like what’s the difference advertising a subsidiary like Disney parks to me or a new car? Just that they own the former.

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#659

Post by AdieuToLogic »

The fact that Copilot injected an ad is burying the lede IMHO, as evidenced by the opening sentence:

  After a team member summoned Copilot to correct
  a typo in a PR of mine ...
Using Copilot "to correct a typo" is the epitome of "jumping the shark"[0].

0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumping_the_shark

Re: Copilot edited an ad into my PR

#660

Post by yarn_ »

jacobgkau wrote: post #639
yarn_ wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, the point about LLM "mistakes" etc being harder to detect is valid, although I'm not entirely sure how to compare this with human hard to detect mistakes. If anything I find LLM code shortcomings often a bit easier to spot because a lot of the time they're just uneeded dependencies, useless comments, useless replication of logic, etc. This is where testing come into play too and I'm definitely reviewing your te…

> If anything I find LLM code shortcomings often a bit easier to spot because a lot of the time they're just uneeded dependencies, useless comments, useless replication of logic, etc. By this logic, it's useful to know whether something was LLM-generated or not because if it was, you can more quickly come to the conclusion that it's LLM weirdness and short-circuit your review there. If it's human code (or if you don'…

>It seems we've uncovered several feasible answers to your question of "why would you want that?"

Fair enough

Post reply on HN