4 ms·

Why should I care if you care. If you value your time you'll maybe be interested in having it write unit tests for you (It worked for me™). If you value protect

Why should I care if you care. If you value your time you'll maybe be interested in having it write unit tests for you (It worked for me™). If you value protecting intellectual property you might care that it's sucking up a lot of it and making available to people who do care. I think it's a losing game because there's enough people willing to give it their intellectual property for free that by the time your get your stuff removed it's already found something similar somewhere else (Drainage my boy!)

maxbond 4y ago
> I think it's a losing game because there's enough people willing to give it their intellectual property for free that by the time your get your stuff removed it's already found something similar somewhere else (Drainage my boy!) I don't think many would find that objectionable; I don't think people who object to the manner GitHub (and OpenAI, etc) has gone about this generally object to the existence of Copilot (or large language models or image generating AIs) itself, so I don't see think we'd be "losing a game". I personally would see it as a great result if these companies were respecting licensing in a rigorous way, or otherwise ensuring that this was more of an opt-in system (I'm not a supporter of intellectual property broadly).
- cjoelrun 4y ago
  Ahh yeah two points got mushed together. I agree they should fight for their IP. I meant more that the value of their snippet of code will go down as others fill in with their own IP.
panny 4y ago
>having it write unit tests for you Can it do this? Does it provide good branch coverage?
Brian_K_White 4y ago
I think most of the authors of opne source code only care that their code is being stripped of credits, not that it's being used. It's not a lot to ask. If it IS somehow an impossible technical challenge that this commercial entity can't manage, but they still want to persue the potential of this technology, they are free to pay other commercial software developers for licences that grant this usage explicitly just like any other commercial use/redistribution license. If that pool of software is too small to be as useful, and too expensive to be practical, so what? Tough shit. I see no reason to excuse how they are currently just not even bothering to do either option, or address the issue in any other way, and are simply outlaw right now.

maxbond 4y ago

> I think it's a losing game because there's enough people willing to give it their intellectual property for free that by the time your get your stuff removed it's already found something similar somewhere else (Drainage my boy!) I don't think many would find that objectionable; I don't think people who object to the manner GitHub (and OpenAI, etc) has gone about this generally object to the existence of Copilot (or large language models or image generating AIs) itself, so I don't see think we'd be "losing a game". I personally would see it as a great result if these companies were respecting licensing in a rigorous way, or otherwise ensuring that this was more of an opt-in system (I'm not a supporter of intellectual property broadly).

cjoelrun 4y ago
Ahh yeah two points got mushed together. I agree they should fight for their IP. I meant more that the value of their snippet of code will go down as others fill in with their own IP.

panny 4y ago

>having it write unit tests for you Can it do this? Does it provide good branch coverage?

Brian_K_White 4y ago

I think most of the authors of opne source code only care that their code is being stripped of credits, not that it's being used. It's not a lot to ask. If it IS somehow an impossible technical challenge that this commercial entity can't manage, but they still want to persue the potential of this technology, they are free to pay other commercial software developers for licences that grant this usage explicitly just like any other commercial use/redistribution license. If that pool of software is too small to be as useful, and too expensive to be practical, so what? Tough shit. I see no reason to excuse how they are currently just not even bothering to do either option, or address the issue in any other way, and are simply outlaw right now.