6 ms·
Yes, I was disappointed to see that.
by hackmiester 4y ago
Yes, I was disappointed to see that.
- spicybright 4y agoWhy disappointed? Is copilot being an option detrimental to your own development?
- xeromal 4y agoYeah, I don't get the hate. I've been using copilot since the release and it's pretty handy. It ain't god's gift to this earth yet, but it's pretty useful for boilerplate scenarios.
- rectang 4y agoGithub Copilot violates the licenses of the open source code that it uses as its source material. I, for one, am pissed off about that. If you don't care about those authors, or don't care about copyright in general, or you agree with Microsoft's sketchy reasoning that copyright violation never occurs in Github Copilot (even though Github Copilot is perfectly capable of regurgitating big verbatim chunks of code from its training corpus)... then you won't get the hate.
- gowld 4y ago> Github Copilot violates the licenses Not even the FSF had made that claim yet. They are still in research mode: https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/fsf-funded-call-for-white-papers-on-philosophical-and-legal-questions-around-copilot https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/fsf-funded-call-for-whit... https://www.fsf.org/news/publication-of-the-fsf-funded-white-papers-on-questions-around-copilot https://www.fsf.org/news/publication-of-the-fsf-funded-white... The latest conclusions so far: https://www.fsf.org/licensing/copilot/copyright-implications-of-the-use-of-code-repositories-to-train-a-machine-learning-model https://www.fsf.org/licensing/copilot/copyright-implications... "Copilot and its developer-customers likely do not infringe developers’ copyrights."
- user3939382 4y agoI find it takes me more time to evaluate and correct its suggestions than to just write the code using regular IDE autocomplete.
- xeromal 4y agoI use VS code which doesn't really have great IDE autocomplete. I'll agree with you when it comes to a proper IDE though or if you use a quality JetBrains product!
- xigoi 4y agoThe existence of Copilot is detrimental to GPL-licensed projects that it steals code from.
- speedgoose 4y agoI read a lot GPL licensed code, does it mean I stole it? Should I put everything I write under the GPL license?
- rectang 4y agoThe answer is straightforward. If the similarity is such that a court would judge that copyright infringement occurred, then that code would have belonged under the GPL. Convincing a court to make a judgement of infringement is not an easy threshold to cross. But Github Copilot, like many AIs, is less judicious than humans about not reproducing its inspirations verbatim: https://twitter.com/mitsuhiko/status/1410886329924194309 https://twitter.com/mitsuhiko/status/1410886329924194309
- xigoi 4y agoIf you're getting paid to memorize snippets of GPL-licensed code and rewrite them into a proprietary codebase, I'd consider that stealing.
- yjftsjthsd-h 4y agoIf you copy-paste chunks of code, which copilot has been caught doing, then yes you absolutely are violating the licenses in question.
- speedgoose 4y agoDo we have another example than the famous quake fast square root function?
- spicybright 4y agoYeah, I'm not fully convinced it's as bad as a lot are making it out to be. What is even considered a copyrightable code snippet? If GPL code had a function like `int add_1(int x) { return x + 1; }` and you copy and pasted it, is that really stealing? What about if you wrote identical code without having looked at the GPL code? Or even if you've seen the GPL code but type it from memory? Or if you copy from someone that illegally copied the GPL code? It seems very non trivial with small functions like this, which is exactly the kind of code copilot outputs anyways. It's not like you're stealing large and unique parts of the code.