Live data from Hacker News

Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

kite.com

91–100 of 547 posts

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

#91
The thesis that helping developers write code has value is flat wrong. We spend so much more time reading, reviewing, designing, arguing/bitching about code than we do writing it. Orders of magnitude more.

Any developer tooling company must understand this basic fact.

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

#92
post #18

"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’d recommend anybody thinking about building a devtool to read Neil Davidson’s “Don’t roll the dice”. It’s a pretty old book, but Neil has also made it available for free now and the general lessons still hold true today.

Some IC developers will pay for tools, it’s very hard to have that happen at a price point that supports the scale required. So feature discriminate on the things their boss needs, and charge for that. And then the next set of features for their bosses’ boss, and so on until you’re selling into the C-suite.

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

#93

I never cared a lot about Kite. But oh boy, suddenly it's the only product in a category I do care about! Thank you!

What category is that? Open source code generation?

If so, there are others too, like Fauxpilot, and the Salesforce one, both are open source I believe.

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

#94

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.

I _love_ Copilot but the only reason I use it is because I qualify under their open source developers program, I just can't justify paying $10/month for it.

How much do you love it, then? What would you pay, if it's less than $10/mo?

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

#95
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…

Out of interest, how are you using it to write tests? Do you just write "make a test for functionX" or something? (Don't have much experience with it)

The best part about it for me is just the Intellisense (in Typescript). I'm using it on probably 3/5 lines that I write as a smarter version, but I rarely use it to do more than finish the current line I am writing.

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

#96

I disagree with their statement that individual developers do not pay for tools. I have paid for tools out of my own pocket on many occasions. However, being able to deliver code 18% faster isn't enough to fork out $9.99 a month. First of all it is relatively expensive. For that amount I can get a personal license for PyCharm. Secondly coding speed never tends to be a bottle neck for delivering a feature or a product…

[deleted]

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

#97
Automating software is a really hard problem. I think I can imagine a possible roadmap to it, but it's so hard to explain it in under an hour, it would require several sequential new technologies, and some of it hinges on parts of information theory I don't know enough about, and statistical ML isn't part of the core.

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

#98
I've used Kite, it simply wasn't as good as Copilot. I'm not sure why they say that Copilot still doesn't work well, it works well enough for me and I presume everyone else who pays for it.

That being said, glad to see a lack of Our Incredible Journey type language here and more of a true postmortem of their business and technical decisions. It is rare to see a company go into so much detail when shutting down.

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

#99
post #18

"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…

"Our diagnosis is that individual developers do not pay for tools."

I think this is probably true. If you need a tool for your day job, your company ought to be paying for it. Some companies have slush funds for small purchases like books, but subscription costs for services would normally need to be approved. If you're a solo consultant then perhaps you'd pay for tools that make you more productive. But for personal projects the value-add would have to be pretty high to be paying another O($10-20) a month on top of other subscriptions.

The big group of "hobbyist" coders are students, and they get copilot for free via Github's very generous edu package (and so does anyone with an edu email address I think). The bigger problem is that this is a very expensive project. It's better suited to a big company with money to burn and deep pockets to give it away to junior devs who will evanglise for it at their new companies (e.g. students) for nothing. See Matlab.

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

#100

I disagree with their statement that individual developers do not pay for tools. I have paid for tools out of my own pocket on many occasions. However, being able to deliver code 18% faster isn't enough to fork out $9.99 a month. First of all it is relatively expensive. For that amount I can get a personal license for PyCharm. Secondly coding speed never tends to be a bottle neck for delivering a feature or a product…

Most importantly, coding is the fun part of the job. This seems like trying to sell a DALL-E-esq product to a visual artist promising 18% faster deliverables. Even if it is true, who is going to be in a rush to give way in that aspect of the job and sell their manager on it to spend more time doing the less fun things?

On the other hand, create an AI that can stand in during pointless meetings and the blank checks will shower down.

Post reply on HN