4 ms·
This comment is complete FUD as you’re linking to a tertiary paragraph in a document describing how your data may be used if the owner of a private repository e
by halostatue 3y ago
This comment is complete FUD as you’re linking to a tertiary paragraph in a document describing how your data may be used if the owner of a private repository enable it, for such use as Dependabot, CodeQL, or secrets scanning.
The top of the document is:
> GitHub aggregates metadata and parses content patterns for the purposes of delivering generalized insights within the product. It uses data from public repositories, and also uses metadata and aggregate data from private repositories when a repository's owner has chosen to share the data with GitHub by enabling the dependency graph. If you enable the dependency graph for a private repository, then GitHub will perform read-only analysis of that specific private repository.
> If you enable data use for a private repository, we will continue to treat your private data, source code, or trade secrets as confidential and private consistent with our Terms of Service. The information we learn only comes from aggregated data. For more information, see "Managing data use settings for your private repository."
Taking a single paragraph out of context isn’t worthy of the top-voted comment.
- waynecochran 3y agoI call BS. OpenAI was originally meant to be an open source and non-profit company. It is now a closed source, for-profit company and is controlled by the company that gave FUD its original meaning for discrediting others who stood against it. It is supreme naivety to think they will not use whatever they can to gain power in the AI arena. There is nothing in that statement that a high powered lawyer can not twist and bend to their liking. I can easily see the transformer matrix weights being defines as "aggregate data" -- "they are just floating point numbers -- they are not anyone's source code."
- halostatue 3y agoOpenAI != GitHub even if GitHub has allowed training on public repositories (which I believe to be an absolute mistake because it should be preserving licensing on the processed repositories and we know that it is not doing so). There are many reasons to distrust Microsoft. The wording of this particular paragraph explaining how data gets used in accordance with the linked terms of service (which are the actual governing documents, not the page you’ve linked to) is not one.
- waynecochran 3y agoGitHub = MS, OpenAI = MS, so by transitivity OpenAI = GitHub (where = means "controlling or related interest"). I agree that the particular wording is not sufficient to specify much of anything, but does it sure doesn't shut the door on the possibility either.
- halostatue 3y agoOpenAI is not a subsidiary of Microsoft. GitHub is. Unless you can meaningfully show that Microsoft is actively applying a subsidiary relationship (that is, where it directs OpenAI’s product direction), I have to disagree with your base notion. At this point, I reiterate that your original claim is 100% FUD and disinformation. I’m not asking you to trust GitHub or Microsoft, but legal terms have meaning and the terms do not support your assertions.
- waynecochran 3y agoMS is a partner w OpenAI. https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2023/01/23/microsoftandopenaiextendpartnership/ https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2023/01/23/microsoftandopen...