4 ms·

Honestly I just ditched the idea of Copilot the moment it spewed out an entire file of copied code. Nice work on making a markov bot with extra steps GitHub. P

by corobo 5y ago

Honestly I just ditched the idea of Copilot the moment it spewed out an entire file of copied code. Nice work on making a markov bot with extra steps GitHub. Please, do take my money..

maccard 5y ago
It never did that. It got the license wrong so it wasn't an exact copy...
- corobo 5y ago
  Until a court decides what it does and doesn't do I'm staying clear Here's it outputting Quake code, including handy comments it came up with for each line and even an entire line of commented out code. Maybe it decided it was a good choice to comment it out but still include it I guess Being word for word from the original is just a weird coincidence too I truly wanted it to be as good as it was sold to us too, but it isn't https://twitter.com/mitsuhiko/status/1410886329924194309 https://twitter.com/mitsuhiko/status/1410886329924194309 HN discussion at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27710287 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27710287 Additionally here's it somehow requesting and using API keys for use in your code https://twitter.com/passcod/status/1410822834272694275 https://twitter.com/passcod/status/1410822834272694275
  - maccard 5y ago
    It didn't copy the entire file for quake - it got the license wrong (which is even worse!) That what I said in my original comment!
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - corobo 5y ago
      Ah I see. I think my perception of your point was altered by you having been downvoted by someone making the text grey (can't read text = bad comment). Sorry about that. I'll try to avoid letting downvotes bias me in future
- temac 5y ago
  Yes; that's even worse.
make3 5y ago
this is the worse take I've seen so far
- corobo 5y ago
  Could you explain why or do you just want to feel superior? Both good choices honestly but I'd love to know your actual thoughts If I'm wrong tell me why and I'll happily reevaluate my opinion, promise :)
  - scoopertrooper 5y ago
    Are you aware co-pilot is still in preview? It's a bit harsh to make sweeping statements along the lines of 'it's just a fancy markov bot' based on a few well-publicised glitches in a technical preview. I assume you have built something surpassing the scope and ambition of co-pilot before, not just some armchair tech lead throwing shade.
    - corobo 5y ago
      Fair point on the sweeping statement, I'll rein it in Thinking about it the main factor is an emotional one. I'm disappointed. Butthurt if you will. It sounded great but it tripped over so far away from the finish line that I've turned against it. I'll excuse myself from any further copilot threads Of course I can never meet the requirements of your post wanting something more impressive than Copilot. Copilot itself falls far short of that. Nothing I give you will be enough as there'll be flaws you will attack to make your point. Bit of a time sink that, lets just assume you're right :) No, I've never successfully built anything as ambitious as, and definitely nothing surpassing, copilot. Have I tried? Absolutely. Have I failed? So far yes. Of course by that logic though I still win this conversation if you've not succeeded in making anything more ambitious than my failed projects, is that correct? :P For the sake of not wanting to come off as blagging (also I want the holes poked in this one tbf) my most ambitious project I've not figured out how to make work yet is a new (afaik) type of business model: cohan.me/profit-share
  - make3 5y ago
    Well, my understanding is that your point is that it's not useful and only regurgitates code it already saw. That's super false, it's useful tool that generates code in a very context sensitive manner. Not always perfect, and in alpha, but still very useful. The full copying only results from people actively probing the model to output copies of the code, and they made it work for very famous code that's been copied around github a bunch of times. That doesn't make it a non-useful piece of software.

by corobo 5y ago

Honestly I just ditched the idea of Copilot the moment it spewed out an entire file of copied code. Nice work on making a markov bot with extra steps GitHub. Please, do take my money..

maccard 5y ago

It never did that. It got the license wrong so it wasn't an exact copy...

corobo 5y ago
Until a court decides what it does and doesn't do I'm staying clear Here's it outputting Quake code, including handy comments it came up with for each line and even an entire line of commented out code. Maybe it decided it was a good choice to comment it out but still include it I guess Being word for word from the original is just a weird coincidence too I truly wanted it to be as good as it was sold to us too, but it isn't https://twitter.com/mitsuhiko/status/1410886329924194309 https://twitter.com/mitsuhiko/status/1410886329924194309 HN discussion at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27710287 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27710287 Additionally here's it somehow requesting and using API keys for use in your code https://twitter.com/passcod/status/1410822834272694275 https://twitter.com/passcod/status/1410822834272694275
- maccard 5y ago
  It didn't copy the entire file for quake - it got the license wrong (which is even worse!) That what I said in my original comment!
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - corobo 5y ago
    Ah I see. I think my perception of your point was altered by you having been downvoted by someone making the text grey (can't read text = bad comment). Sorry about that. I'll try to avoid letting downvotes bias me in future
temac 5y ago
Yes; that's even worse.

make3 5y ago

this is the worse take I've seen so far

corobo 5y ago
Could you explain why or do you just want to feel superior? Both good choices honestly but I'd love to know your actual thoughts If I'm wrong tell me why and I'll happily reevaluate my opinion, promise :)
- scoopertrooper 5y ago
  Are you aware co-pilot is still in preview? It's a bit harsh to make sweeping statements along the lines of 'it's just a fancy markov bot' based on a few well-publicised glitches in a technical preview. I assume you have built something surpassing the scope and ambition of co-pilot before, not just some armchair tech lead throwing shade.
  - corobo 5y ago
    Fair point on the sweeping statement, I'll rein it in Thinking about it the main factor is an emotional one. I'm disappointed. Butthurt if you will. It sounded great but it tripped over so far away from the finish line that I've turned against it. I'll excuse myself from any further copilot threads Of course I can never meet the requirements of your post wanting something more impressive than Copilot. Copilot itself falls far short of that. Nothing I give you will be enough as there'll be flaws you will attack to make your point. Bit of a time sink that, lets just assume you're right :) No, I've never successfully built anything as ambitious as, and definitely nothing surpassing, copilot. Have I tried? Absolutely. Have I failed? So far yes. Of course by that logic though I still win this conversation if you've not succeeded in making anything more ambitious than my failed projects, is that correct? :P For the sake of not wanting to come off as blagging (also I want the holes poked in this one tbf) my most ambitious project I've not figured out how to make work yet is a new (afaik) type of business model: cohan.me/profit-share
- make3 5y ago
  Well, my understanding is that your point is that it's not useful and only regurgitates code it already saw. That's super false, it's useful tool that generates code in a very context sensitive manner. Not always perfect, and in alpha, but still very useful. The full copying only results from people actively probing the model to output copies of the code, and they made it work for very famous code that's been copied around github a bunch of times. That doesn't make it a non-useful piece of software.