81–90 of 547 posts
One last reminder that they once hijacked several open-source repos to inject advertisements for their service into the codebases. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14836653
Buying something and then changing it is not "hijacking" that thing.
> many programmers would consider [this] a violation of the open-source spirit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Loads of devs I’ve spoken to, from junior to principal level, absolutely love Github Copilot though. Don’t know who is paying it for them, nor if Kite was significantly worse, but I think that at least Copilot has a brilliant future ahead of it.
It's interesting, the ones I've spoken to are extremely suspicious. "GitHub Copilot blocks your ability to learn." Is a common refrain. I don't see ANY industry-wide consensus on whether GitHub Copilot truly helps developers right now. The only scenario I can get anyone to agree on is generating templates. Aka, JSON or CSS files that you then edit.
> The largest issue is that state-of-the-art models don’t understand the structure of code, such as non-local context. Depending on how local he's talking, this isn't really true of Copilot. In my experience it will use context all the way up to the top of the file, even in very long files. And at least the Rust version even seems to look at the imports—if you have a use declaration it will actually correctly build a…
One last reminder that they once hijacked several open-source repos to inject advertisements for their service into the codebases. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14836653
Instead of making the untrue statement above, just say
"They used, in my opinion, an unethical way to advertise their product; specifically, they bought OSS products and put their ads in there."
"Our diagnosis is that individual developers do not pay for tools. Their manager might, but engineering managers only want to pay for discrete new capabilities, i.e. making their developers 18% faster when writing code did not resonate strongly enough." I never used Kite, but I've tried Github Copilot twice, and found it marginal at best (and distracting at worst - which is why I turned it off both times). If Kite wa…
I pay for copilot. It saves me a modest number of minutes of time per week. That's worth a small fee. And before someone jumps in: I and my other co-founder who also uses copilot (We are the only two in the company who do, I think, without checking) are the compliance team. We're both very senior and use copilot basically a line or three at a time as a smart autocomplete. It's still worth it.
These guys were a complete joke; and a good example of fleecing the VC community. Good riddance to bad rubbish
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Loads of devs I’ve spoken to, from junior to principal level, absolutely love Github Copilot though. Don’t know who is paying it for them, nor if Kite was significantly worse, but I think that at least Copilot has a brilliant future ahead of it.
It's interesting, the ones I've spoken to are extremely suspicious. "GitHub Copilot blocks your ability to learn." Is a common refrain. I don't see ANY industry-wide consensus on whether GitHub Copilot truly helps developers right now. The only scenario I can get anyone to agree on is generating templates. Aka, JSON or CSS files that you then edit.
copilot: "Get code suggestions in more than a dozen coding languages including Python, JavaScript, TypeScript, Go, and Ruby", how about c, c++ even lua here? if they cover c and c++ I can pay $10 per month right away.