4 ms·

Do they train on your code that they read for context? Do they retain the code snippets you generate? Can't find any mention in regards to privacy in their copy

Do they train on your code that they read for context? Do they retain the code snippets you generate? Can't find any mention in regards to privacy in their copy.

esperent 4y ago
It's Amazon so assume that they do unless it's extremely clearly stated that they don't. And even then...
- j_maffe 4y ago
  It's opt out.
  - maicro 4y ago
    "Hey Alexa, disable all microphones." "Sure." "Thanks Alexa." "You're welcome."...
    - ilc 4y ago
      The hardware mute on Amazon Alexa's is actually supposed to be a real mute, and on the Echo 5 we have, there's a hardware shutter over the camera. Once the hardware mute is engaged, I've not had the Alexa reply. Don't get me wrong, there's plenty of reasons to bash Amazon. I just don't count Alexa and privacy with mute among them.
      - maicro 4y ago
        Fair point, though I will say unless I look at the circuit myself and confirm the hardware mute switch is cutting an actual signal to/from the microphone, I won't fully trust it. Whether that matters is up for debate - I carry around a Google Pixel phone all day, and while I don't use any of the voice assistants, I also don't audit everything closely enough to guarantee nothing is spying on me randomly. As for my joke in general - I guess my point, if I have to make one beyond making a joke, is that I don't really trust any company to do what they claim in all circumstances. Even if they have every intention of doing so, some bug or bad actor could compromise the intent - not saying it's identical, but look at the recent issue with Tesla camera pictures being shared. So if you're working on some mission critical or top secret code, I wouldn't trust _anything_ to be running or looking at it - not Copilot, CodeWhisperer, etc. etc.
    - brutusurp 4y ago
      Exactly this.
    - progmetaldev 4y ago
      Wireshark on your network. I know this was probably tongue in cheek, and not undeserved, but you can always prove this.
      - maicro 4y ago
        It was indeed a joke, but yeah, that's valid (and was how the Eufy issue was discovered IIRC).
- PartiallyTyped 4y ago
  AWS is very stringent when it comes to user privacy.
  - pleb_nz 4y ago
    Sounds like you trust what a big corporate entity with many arms whose primary purpose is to generate for shareholders
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - _cenw 4y ago
      AWS is very different from Amazon in that regard. I've used GCP and AWS for about equal time and Google was the one with several worrisome overreaches into customer's accounts moments. Meanwhile AWS actually lets you view and adjust the role and policy given to customer support on your account.
      - pleb_nz 4y ago
        Fully aware AWS and amazon are different, but my point still stands IMO. Not sure why some people have so much trust in massive corporations who utlimately are all about making money for shareholders. For some people it's like supporting a sports team. My trust in them is one of caution and low expectations.
        PartiallyTyped 4y ago
        I said that because I worked at AWS, because I have seen the internal processes in action, and because I am aware that AWS has far more to lose by looking at customer data than they can gain.
        pleb_nz 4y ago
        Understand that as well, but its not always enough of a deterrent for some companies. And things change. Caution is a good thing IMO, e.g. don't lock yourself in so you're always capable of moving your solutions.
mplanchard 4y ago
It’s opt-out for the free version: https://aws.amazon.com/codewhisperer/faqs/ https://aws.amazon.com/codewhisperer/faqs/
- croes 4y ago
  Hard to prove if they use it anyway
- bennyp101 4y ago
  https://docs.aws.amazon.com/codewhisperer/latest/userguide/sharing-data.html https://docs.aws.amazon.com/codewhisperer/latest/userguide/s...
yrgulation 4y ago
[dead]
chakhs 4y ago
first thought I had was "they made it free to collect data since they don't own github or similar"

Do they train on your code that they read for context? Do they retain the code snippets you generate? Can't find any mention in regards to privacy in their copy.

esperent 4y ago

It's Amazon so assume that they do unless it's extremely clearly stated that they don't. And even then...

j_maffe 4y ago
It's opt out.
- maicro 4y ago
  "Hey Alexa, disable all microphones." "Sure." "Thanks Alexa." "You're welcome."...
  - ilc 4y ago
    The hardware mute on Amazon Alexa's is actually supposed to be a real mute, and on the Echo 5 we have, there's a hardware shutter over the camera. Once the hardware mute is engaged, I've not had the Alexa reply. Don't get me wrong, there's plenty of reasons to bash Amazon. I just don't count Alexa and privacy with mute among them.
    - maicro 4y ago
      Fair point, though I will say unless I look at the circuit myself and confirm the hardware mute switch is cutting an actual signal to/from the microphone, I won't fully trust it. Whether that matters is up for debate - I carry around a Google Pixel phone all day, and while I don't use any of the voice assistants, I also don't audit everything closely enough to guarantee nothing is spying on me randomly. As for my joke in general - I guess my point, if I have to make one beyond making a joke, is that I don't really trust any company to do what they claim in all circumstances. Even if they have every intention of doing so, some bug or bad actor could compromise the intent - not saying it's identical, but look at the recent issue with Tesla camera pictures being shared. So if you're working on some mission critical or top secret code, I wouldn't trust _anything_ to be running or looking at it - not Copilot, CodeWhisperer, etc. etc.
  - brutusurp 4y ago
    Exactly this.
  - progmetaldev 4y ago
    Wireshark on your network. I know this was probably tongue in cheek, and not undeserved, but you can always prove this.
    - maicro 4y ago
      It was indeed a joke, but yeah, that's valid (and was how the Eufy issue was discovered IIRC).
PartiallyTyped 4y ago
AWS is very stringent when it comes to user privacy.
- pleb_nz 4y ago
  Sounds like you trust what a big corporate entity with many arms whose primary purpose is to generate for shareholders
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - _cenw 4y ago
    AWS is very different from Amazon in that regard. I've used GCP and AWS for about equal time and Google was the one with several worrisome overreaches into customer's accounts moments. Meanwhile AWS actually lets you view and adjust the role and policy given to customer support on your account.
    - pleb_nz 4y ago
      Fully aware AWS and amazon are different, but my point still stands IMO. Not sure why some people have so much trust in massive corporations who utlimately are all about making money for shareholders. For some people it's like supporting a sports team. My trust in them is one of caution and low expectations.
      - PartiallyTyped 4y ago
        I said that because I worked at AWS, because I have seen the internal processes in action, and because I am aware that AWS has far more to lose by looking at customer data than they can gain.
        pleb_nz 4y ago
        Understand that as well, but its not always enough of a deterrent for some companies. And things change. Caution is a good thing IMO, e.g. don't lock yourself in so you're always capable of moving your solutions.

mplanchard 4y ago

It’s opt-out for the free version: https://aws.amazon.com/codewhisperer/faqs/ https://aws.amazon.com/codewhisperer/faqs/

croes 4y ago
Hard to prove if they use it anyway
bennyp101 4y ago
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/codewhisperer/latest/userguide/sharing-data.html https://docs.aws.amazon.com/codewhisperer/latest/userguide/s...

yrgulation 4y ago

[dead]

chakhs 4y ago

first thought I had was "they made it free to collect data since they don't own github or similar"