6 ms·

> I've been using Copilot non-stop > I am honestly flabbergasted they think it's worth 10$/mo These two statments seem contradictory to me. Why are you using

by jmkni 4y ago

> I've been using Copilot non-stop > I am honestly flabbergasted they think it's worth 10$/mo These two statments seem contradictory to me. Why are you using it 'non-stop' if it isn't even worth $10/month?

soraki_soladead 4y ago
My interpretation is that it's fun to use so they use it a lot but not altogether useful (eta: and/or necessary): they didn't miss it on work projects.
foerbert 4y ago
I don't think they are contradictory at all. Aside from the basic "it has value, just less than $10/month" option, they may also just be interested in the tech and are evaluating it in actual use, etc.
raunak 4y ago
Not OP - I use it non-stop for boiler plate filling as well. I wouldn't use it for anything other than that, so I would say it's worth honestly at max $1/month.
- tedunangst 4y ago
  $1 is worth what, one minute of your time? If you're using a tool that doesn't even save you one minute, why bother?
  - presentation 4y ago
    Most people don't make purchasing decisions based on the value they create but rather based on some ingrained assumptions about how expensive software is supposed to be. VSCode and many other complex pieces of software are free, autocomplete is built into my OS, and those subscription consumer software that does have a price usually are priced very low—so relative to those, $10/month feels like a lot (even though I hope that practically anything anyone makes the effort to subscribe to produces at least $10 of value for them). Some companies seem to be leaning into higher subscription pricing (Superhuman and Motion come to mind) and almost certainly produce far more value than their subscriptions cost if you ask me, but there's definitely a mental barrier to value based pricing to consumers, as well as the fact that with so many companies offering cheap/free software, the market isn't solely determined by value created but rather comparison against other software.
    - tedunangst 4y ago
      You'd think "very smart" programmers would be equipped to do basic cost/benefit analysis. If it costs $900 and provides $1000 in value, that's $100 more than not buying it.
      - conradfr 4y ago
        It depends if as a employee, your working time stays the same.
        zarzavat 4y ago
        If you’re an employee your company should pay for it. If not, find a better employer!
      - account42 4y ago
        You'd think "very smart" programmers would be equipped to consider additional factors such as the cost of getting reliant on a tool controlled by a single vendor as well as the effects on other things that they care about. You'd think they also understand that people are not machines and reducing a task by a certain time does not neccessarily mean that they can get that much more work more done overall.
        tedunangst 4y ago
        If the amortized benefit is less than one minute per month, then it's probably best to simply pass instead of hoping for a price adjustment.
  - xigoi 4y ago
    What proportion of people are making $1 per minute?
    - tedunangst 4y ago
      $1 per minute is approximately $120k annual salary, so... almost anybody doing software development in the US?
      - price 4y ago
        That's not true. The median annual pay for a software engineer in the US is a bit under $100k. (The Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes good data on this.) That means most people doing software development in the US are making under $100k. Almost anybody doing software development at a well-funded tech company is going to be making over $120k/yr, yes. But it turns out there are lots of other kinds of programming jobs, too.
      - xigoi 4y ago
        And the USA is what, 4% of the world population?
omginternets 4y ago
You overlooked an even bigger contradiction! Namely: > The biggest problem I've had is not that it doesn't write correctly, it's that it think it knows how and then produce good looking code at a glance but with wrong logic. I cannot rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that would provoke such a statement. EDIT: upon careful rereading, I think I misunderstood. The intended meaning is likely closer to: the problem is less so that codepilot produces incorrect code and more so that its incorrect code appears correct at first glance. You have my sincerest apologies. I leave this thread intact as a testament to my hair-trigger snark.
- lkfsfldkjfslk 4y ago
  My read was that it produces code that is correct in some circumstances, but is incorrect for the author's use case.
  - omginternets 4y ago
    I realize I misinterpreted the OP, but you’ve set me up for a snarky remark so perfectly that I can’t resist. Please forgive me… here goes: > it produces code that is correct in some circumstances, but is incorrect for the author's use case. That’s a mighty convoluted way of saying “incorrect code” ;) Phew! I feel better, now!
    - chipotle_coyote 4y ago
      "This code would be absolutely correct were it in a different program trying to achieve a different result."
- hungryforcodes 4y ago
  I won't rightly describe the confusion your post gives me. Nothing he says seems contradictory. It produces good looking code which upon further inspection has faulty logic. You would expect that from a program that copies a database of all the examples in the world (or whatever) and then just does an autocomplete without any kind of comprehension of what the problem is that is trying to be solved. No confusion or contradiction at all.
kvetching 4y ago
At first, I read it as if he thinks it's worth way more.
- naniwaduni 4y ago
  It honestly might be the kind of product where it might make sense at a higher price point, with more customer buy-in (and support contracts!) to work around its quirks rather than accept everything it spits out at face value. It's a more common pattern than we're used to seeing, I think.
evilduck 4y ago
GPT-3 and AI-enhanced code completion has had a ton of hype going on, up to and including claims that software development as a job is at existential risk. Using Copilot non-stop to investigate and understand why there's so much hype and coming away with the opinion that it's not worthy of $10/mo is not contradictory. Would you rather someone who hasn't used a product extensively make value claims?
- goatlover 4y ago
  It’s always like this with the latest AI. You would think people would learn, but nope same exaggerated claims every time.
  - dotancohen 4y ago
    The claims are sound. It's the technology that is usually not sound, or mature. But slowly enough many jobs are being automated, both with and without machine learning or whatever technique they are calling "AI" today.
theshrike79 4y ago
I've had Copilot enabled since early beta. I think it has saved me ... 15 minutes of typing in total? A few times it has caught on to a repeating pattern and filled a tedious bit of [({}{})] -style javascript correctly. Most of the things it does for me I could replace with a library of snippets if I could be bothered to set one up. Not really worth a monthly cost equivalent to, say, Disney+ - which I use tens of hours every month just by myself. If my employer paid for it, I wouldn't scoff at it, but I'm not paying a cent of my own money for it.
- eurasiantiger 4y ago
  You probably write code in a way that’s hard for the AI to predict. Write stubs, name things first, wire things early, and watch the fireworks.
bravetraveler 4y ago
They gave it a fair shake, decided the price wouldn't be worth it. It's not inherently contradictory I would consider it contradictory if they decided to continue using it while paying that price and unsatisfied It's a trial run and the value isn't there for them
fornowiamhere 4y ago
It looks like they used it "non-stop" on hobby projects to see what's capable of
culi 4y ago
It's an extension... You'd have to go out of your way to disable it. It's also completely optional so it's (almost) only additive. The only harm is sometimes it generates suggestions faster than I can press tab to fix my spacing

by jmkni 4y ago

soraki_soladead 4y ago

My interpretation is that it's fun to use so they use it a lot but not altogether useful (eta: and/or necessary): they didn't miss it on work projects.

foerbert 4y ago

I don't think they are contradictory at all. Aside from the basic "it has value, just less than $10/month" option, they may also just be interested in the tech and are evaluating it in actual use, etc.

raunak 4y ago

Not OP - I use it non-stop for boiler plate filling as well. I wouldn't use it for anything other than that, so I would say it's worth honestly at max $1/month.

tedunangst 4y ago
$1 is worth what, one minute of your time? If you're using a tool that doesn't even save you one minute, why bother?
- presentation 4y ago
  Most people don't make purchasing decisions based on the value they create but rather based on some ingrained assumptions about how expensive software is supposed to be. VSCode and many other complex pieces of software are free, autocomplete is built into my OS, and those subscription consumer software that does have a price usually are priced very low—so relative to those, $10/month feels like a lot (even though I hope that practically anything anyone makes the effort to subscribe to produces at least $10 of value for them). Some companies seem to be leaning into higher subscription pricing (Superhuman and Motion come to mind) and almost certainly produce far more value than their subscriptions cost if you ask me, but there's definitely a mental barrier to value based pricing to consumers, as well as the fact that with so many companies offering cheap/free software, the market isn't solely determined by value created but rather comparison against other software.
  - tedunangst 4y ago
    You'd think "very smart" programmers would be equipped to do basic cost/benefit analysis. If it costs $900 and provides $1000 in value, that's $100 more than not buying it.
    - conradfr 4y ago
      It depends if as a employee, your working time stays the same.
      - zarzavat 4y ago
        If you’re an employee your company should pay for it. If not, find a better employer!
    - account42 4y ago
      You'd think "very smart" programmers would be equipped to consider additional factors such as the cost of getting reliant on a tool controlled by a single vendor as well as the effects on other things that they care about. You'd think they also understand that people are not machines and reducing a task by a certain time does not neccessarily mean that they can get that much more work more done overall.
      - tedunangst 4y ago
        If the amortized benefit is less than one minute per month, then it's probably best to simply pass instead of hoping for a price adjustment.
- xigoi 4y ago
  What proportion of people are making $1 per minute?
  - tedunangst 4y ago
    $1 per minute is approximately $120k annual salary, so... almost anybody doing software development in the US?
    - price 4y ago
      That's not true. The median annual pay for a software engineer in the US is a bit under $100k. (The Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes good data on this.) That means most people doing software development in the US are making under $100k. Almost anybody doing software development at a well-funded tech company is going to be making over $120k/yr, yes. But it turns out there are lots of other kinds of programming jobs, too.
    - xigoi 4y ago
      And the USA is what, 4% of the world population?

omginternets 4y ago

You overlooked an even bigger contradiction! Namely: > The biggest problem I've had is not that it doesn't write correctly, it's that it think it knows how and then produce good looking code at a glance but with wrong logic. I cannot rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that would provoke such a statement. EDIT: upon careful rereading, I think I misunderstood. The intended meaning is likely closer to: the problem is less so that codepilot produces incorrect code and more so that its incorrect code appears correct at first glance. You have my sincerest apologies. I leave this thread intact as a testament to my hair-trigger snark.

lkfsfldkjfslk 4y ago
My read was that it produces code that is correct in some circumstances, but is incorrect for the author's use case.
- omginternets 4y ago
  I realize I misinterpreted the OP, but you’ve set me up for a snarky remark so perfectly that I can’t resist. Please forgive me… here goes: > it produces code that is correct in some circumstances, but is incorrect for the author's use case. That’s a mighty convoluted way of saying “incorrect code” ;) Phew! I feel better, now!
  - chipotle_coyote 4y ago
    "This code would be absolutely correct were it in a different program trying to achieve a different result."
hungryforcodes 4y ago
I won't rightly describe the confusion your post gives me. Nothing he says seems contradictory. It produces good looking code which upon further inspection has faulty logic. You would expect that from a program that copies a database of all the examples in the world (or whatever) and then just does an autocomplete without any kind of comprehension of what the problem is that is trying to be solved. No confusion or contradiction at all.

kvetching 4y ago

At first, I read it as if he thinks it's worth way more.

naniwaduni 4y ago
It honestly might be the kind of product where it might make sense at a higher price point, with more customer buy-in (and support contracts!) to work around its quirks rather than accept everything it spits out at face value. It's a more common pattern than we're used to seeing, I think.

evilduck 4y ago

GPT-3 and AI-enhanced code completion has had a ton of hype going on, up to and including claims that software development as a job is at existential risk. Using Copilot non-stop to investigate and understand why there's so much hype and coming away with the opinion that it's not worthy of $10/mo is not contradictory. Would you rather someone who hasn't used a product extensively make value claims?

goatlover 4y ago
It’s always like this with the latest AI. You would think people would learn, but nope same exaggerated claims every time.
- dotancohen 4y ago
  The claims are sound. It's the technology that is usually not sound, or mature. But slowly enough many jobs are being automated, both with and without machine learning or whatever technique they are calling "AI" today.

theshrike79 4y ago

I've had Copilot enabled since early beta. I think it has saved me ... 15 minutes of typing in total? A few times it has caught on to a repeating pattern and filled a tedious bit of [({}{})] -style javascript correctly. Most of the things it does for me I could replace with a library of snippets if I could be bothered to set one up. Not really worth a monthly cost equivalent to, say, Disney+ - which I use tens of hours every month just by myself. If my employer paid for it, I wouldn't scoff at it, but I'm not paying a cent of my own money for it.

eurasiantiger 4y ago
You probably write code in a way that’s hard for the AI to predict. Write stubs, name things first, wire things early, and watch the fireworks.

bravetraveler 4y ago

They gave it a fair shake, decided the price wouldn't be worth it. It's not inherently contradictory I would consider it contradictory if they decided to continue using it while paying that price and unsatisfied It's a trial run and the value isn't there for them

fornowiamhere 4y ago

It looks like they used it "non-stop" on hobby projects to see what's capable of

culi 4y ago

It's an extension... You'd have to go out of your way to disable it. It's also completely optional so it's (almost) only additive. The only harm is sometimes it generates suggestions faster than I can press tab to fix my spacing