3 ms·

This looks like a big nothing burger. Even if it picks out usernames or obscure names, it doesn't mean that those names have anything associated to the generate

This looks like a big nothing burger. Even if it picks out usernames or obscure names, it doesn't mean that those names have anything associated to the generated comment. What it shows is people often put brackets with their name after TODO and before the comment.

lmeyerov 4y ago
Kind of the reverse, it's an interesting feature people haven't been using yet / colab can't do well yet: inheriting coding style a MAJOR element of prompt engineering in stable diffusion for image generation is specifying the artist name(s) you want it to be like. so picking a defensive coder, terse coder, enterprise coder, etc, may reflect on the type of code you want.
- luckylion 4y ago
  That'll be fun for attribution of attacks where code is being known. Previously, we relied on office hours and the occasional keyboard layout shining through. If you can say "here's the code for the trojan, please rewrite it in the style of this github account", things will be much more fun.
leereeves 4y ago
I think it's interesting. Not because it exposes names, but because it shows (again) that Copilot is reproducing training data verbatim. And when the time comes to explain Copilot to laypeople (say, in court), this is an example they can understand.
- philliphaydon 4y ago
  It’s interesting sure. AI has a long way to go. It knows something should be there after the user types (@ but it doesn’t understand what is typically typed there. So it offers suggestions. I feel like the tweet is panic like there’s something wrong and data is being leaked which I don’t think is the case. However someone said it exposed keys. That could be bad for sure!
  - jen20 4y ago
    I am legitimately looking forward to a test legal case about the obvious licensing violations that reproducing input data verbatim cause. The API keys already happened within hours of availability [1]. [1]: https://fossbytes.com/github-copilot-generating-functional-api-keys/ https://fossbytes.com/github-copilot-generating-functional-a...
- yreg 4y ago
  Of course it produces training data verbatim. Any single character is verbatim training data. Question is what are the longest strings that it can reproduce verbatim.
  - leereeves 4y ago
    I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think "longest" is important, legally. AIUI, if you wrote a story about a character named "Harry Potter" and used nothing else from the originals, you'd still be violating copyright. Not that these names are important. I just think a lawyer might use this example to show that Copilot is copying (without anyone's eyes glazing over), then show some complex code and argue that the code was both copied and important. The first makes the second easier to understand and accept.
ketchupdebugger 4y ago
yeah but what if instead of names you put your github handle? If copilot trains on that and instead of first names, its might auto complete with random people's handles. Sounds like a privacy concern

lmeyerov 4y ago

Kind of the reverse, it's an interesting feature people haven't been using yet / colab can't do well yet: inheriting coding style a MAJOR element of prompt engineering in stable diffusion for image generation is specifying the artist name(s) you want it to be like. so picking a defensive coder, terse coder, enterprise coder, etc, may reflect on the type of code you want.

luckylion 4y ago
That'll be fun for attribution of attacks where code is being known. Previously, we relied on office hours and the occasional keyboard layout shining through. If you can say "here's the code for the trojan, please rewrite it in the style of this github account", things will be much more fun.

leereeves 4y ago

I think it's interesting. Not because it exposes names, but because it shows (again) that Copilot is reproducing training data verbatim. And when the time comes to explain Copilot to laypeople (say, in court), this is an example they can understand.

philliphaydon 4y ago
It’s interesting sure. AI has a long way to go. It knows something should be there after the user types (@ but it doesn’t understand what is typically typed there. So it offers suggestions. I feel like the tweet is panic like there’s something wrong and data is being leaked which I don’t think is the case. However someone said it exposed keys. That could be bad for sure!
- jen20 4y ago
  I am legitimately looking forward to a test legal case about the obvious licensing violations that reproducing input data verbatim cause. The API keys already happened within hours of availability [1]. [1]: https://fossbytes.com/github-copilot-generating-functional-api-keys/ https://fossbytes.com/github-copilot-generating-functional-a...
yreg 4y ago
Of course it produces training data verbatim. Any single character is verbatim training data. Question is what are the longest strings that it can reproduce verbatim.
- leereeves 4y ago
  I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think "longest" is important, legally. AIUI, if you wrote a story about a character named "Harry Potter" and used nothing else from the originals, you'd still be violating copyright. Not that these names are important. I just think a lawyer might use this example to show that Copilot is copying (without anyone's eyes glazing over), then show some complex code and argue that the code was both copied and important. The first makes the second easier to understand and accept.

ketchupdebugger 4y ago

yeah but what if instead of names you put your github handle? If copilot trains on that and instead of first names, its might auto complete with random people's handles. Sounds like a privacy concern