Open AI Da Vinci playground is the closest there is at the moment
Readit Newsanon2020dot00 commented on Ask HN: Do AI powered teachers exist? · Posted by u/adversaryIdiot
Deleted Comment
Deleted Comment
anon2020dot00 commented on How I make a living working on SerenityOS awesomekling.github.io/Ho... · Posted by u/awesomekling
Good for you!
df
anon2020dot00 commented on GitHub Copilot investigation githubcopilotinvestigatio... · Posted by u/john-doe
Fair use only applies in certain contexts, of which writing commercial software is not one of. 'Snippets' are not fair use and it is shocking how many people here think they are.
People get snippets from Stack Overflow all the time and usually there is no concern whether it is properly attributed or not.
I'd argue that people who open-source code expect other people to learn from it in a small way of snippets and that constitutes fair-use.
anon2020dot00 commented on GitHub Copilot investigation githubcopilotinvestigatio... · Posted by u/john-doe
If X and Y, then my point is valid!
But if either of those are not true, then the GENERAL point is true and your point is not.
---
Gais, gais, I downloaded the code using an automation tool called a browser, so it's fair use and not infringing!
yay for technicalities!
As a software developer, we deal with specific points rather than generalities. Am I doing something illegal or is it fair use? That's the important point to keep in mind and I assume most of Hacker News audience are software devs.
anon2020dot00 commented on GitHub Copilot investigation githubcopilotinvestigatio... · Posted by u/john-doe
a few snippets of a book also isn't a product, and yet it can absolutely be infringing.
If someone bought a copy of an educational book like "Learning Go" and used some code snippets from it in their own product, that's fair use. But if someone released the book as their own product titled "Learning Go Better" then that is a clear violation.
For open-source projects, CoPilot is in the realm of fair-use for snippets but it can be mis-used just like Github can be mis-used if someone blatantly copies a repository.
anon2020dot00 commented on GitHub Copilot investigation githubcopilotinvestigatio... · Posted by u/john-doe
> The idea is that it allows you to INTENTIONALLY void any copyright you want.
It doesn't void copyright.
Anyone that uses code that Copilot spits out which infringes on someone else's copyright is still liable. There's no requirement for intent. That may be a mitigating factor in terms of remediation, but it cannot void the copyright itself.
It can, however, produce a plague of completely ignorant copyright infringement, and since the user of Copilot has no idea where the code is coming from, there's no way to check if it was trained on infringing code.
If I used Copilot I would be real worried about the legal implications for me and that I could easily be accused of copyright infringement or plagiarism[*]. Of course people seem to not really care these days if they can cheat to get ahead so this is probably a feature, and 99.9% of user won't have their reputations ruined by using it.
[*] Although I'm personally more worried about the fact that most of the code will be wikipedia/blogs-quality and filled with bugs, edge cases and performance issues.
Buggy code can easily come from copying Stack Overflow or even from Github open-source repos so I doubt CoPilot would contribute to it anymore than it already is.
anon2020dot00 commented on GitHub Copilot investigation githubcopilotinvestigatio... · Posted by u/john-doe
> What's with the default to "if it's not explicitly legal, it must be illegal"?
That's not how I interpret what's happening.
People who produce things have rights over their products. Be it artists, craftsmen, inventors, entrepreneurs or coders. There is a legitimate question here as to whether CoPilot has infringed upon those rights. I don't see it being about "making something illegal." I see it about answering a valid question as to whether CoPilot is liable for measurable damages caused to creators under existing laws.
A few snippets of code is not a product. If there was an open-source money-making product and someone builds a competing product using considerable help from CoPilot then that is a stronger case for damages then if someone just used some snippets of code in their own product.
But at that point, it would be just like someone cloning the Github code without following the license and in that case, it should become obvious that there is a clear violation harming the creators. But in most use cases of CoPilot, where-in people are just using it to build their own product, I doubt there is a cause for damages.
Markdown for low-level detailed stuff, Trello for higher-level more abstract items