3 ms·

Ok, yes. There are other pieces of code on the internet that use a for loop or an if statement. By that logic what you wrote was also composed that way. After

by dmd 2y ago

Ok, yes. There are other pieces of code on the internet that use a for loop or an if statement. By that logic what you wrote was also composed that way. After all, you’ve used all words that have been used before! I bet even phrases like “that is extremely similar” and “generated from a corpus” and “unambiguously false”. Again, I really find it hard to believe that anyone could make an argument like the one you’re making who has actually used these tools in their work for hundreds of hours, vs. for a couple minutes here or there with made up problems.

wokwokwok 2y ago
> I really find it hard to believe What's true and what's not true is not related to what you personally believe. It is factually and unambiguously false to state that generated code is, in general, not similar to other code from the corpus it is trained on. > And none of it appears anywhere else; I've checked. ^ Even if this statement, is not false (I'm skeptical, but whatever), in general, it would be false for most users of copilot. None of it appears anywhere else? None of it? Really? That's not true of the no-AI code base I'm working on. That's very difficult to believe it would be true on a code base heavily written by copilot and the like. It's probably not true, in general, for AI generated code bases. We can have a different conversation about verbatim copied code, where an AI model generates a large body of verbatim copy from a training source. That's very unusual. ...but to say the generated code wouldn't even be similar? Come on. That's literally what LLMs do.
- dmd 2y ago
  This is like having an argument about whether airplanes can fly with someone who has never been in, piloted, or even really seen an airplane but is very, very sure of their understanding of how they can’t possibly work. Among other things: it writes new, useful code daily in our local DSL, which appears nowhere on the internet and in fact didn't exist a few months ago.

by dmd 2y ago

wokwokwok 2y ago

> I really find it hard to believe What's true and what's not true is not related to what you personally believe. It is factually and unambiguously false to state that generated code is, in general, not similar to other code from the corpus it is trained on. > And none of it appears anywhere else; I've checked. ^ Even if this statement, is not false (I'm skeptical, but whatever), in general, it would be false for most users of copilot. None of it appears anywhere else? None of it? Really? That's not true of the no-AI code base I'm working on. That's very difficult to believe it would be true on a code base heavily written by copilot and the like. It's probably not true, in general, for AI generated code bases. We can have a different conversation about verbatim copied code, where an AI model generates a large body of verbatim copy from a training source. That's very unusual. ...but to say the generated code wouldn't even be similar? Come on. That's literally what LLMs do.

dmd 2y ago
This is like having an argument about whether airplanes can fly with someone who has never been in, piloted, or even really seen an airplane but is very, very sure of their understanding of how they can’t possibly work. Among other things: it writes new, useful code daily in our local DSL, which appears nowhere on the internet and in fact didn't exist a few months ago.