192 comments

[ 3.7 ms ] story [ 104 ms ] thread
(comment deleted)
Next it will be Co-authored by Co-Pilot with help from Dominos Pizza
Please verify that you are pushing to branch 'master' by saying "Doritos™ Dew™ it right!"

ERROR! Merge conflict. Please drink a verification can.

"Sent from my iPhone" marketing only works if people want everyone to know they're using the product.
But you can see it and remove it before sending. It’s definitely not the same.
"sent from my iphone" originally meant more than just "i have a fancy phone that lets me send email" in the early days it meant "I'm not at my desk right now."
I don't really send emails anymore but when I actually used email to keep in touch with friends (during the interesting bit of time between smart phones becoming mainstream and SMS and other messaging services becoming more popular than email), I changed my signature to be "Sent from your iPhone" even though I used an android and mainly sent emails from my computer, just to be an edgy teenager. Got some interesting responses from that.

It's interesting to see how communication, digital and otherwise, has evolved over time.

Huh. I always thought the point of "Sent from my iPhone" (or the earlier "Sent from my Blackberry") was that it indicated "I don't have access to my desktop and file server right now so don't expect me to send that file".
Growth hacking at its best /s
(comment deleted)
Does that make the code uncopyrightable? Non-human authorship?
The real question is why Anthropic was able to use DMCA takedown requests "in good faith" against the Claude leaks when their own CTO claimed it is a 100% slopcoded codebase, and they themselves argue that all LLM generated code is transformed enough to not be copyrightable. Which they have to state without being able to turn back because they violated millions of book and software licenses during training.

Make it make sense.

Whenever I use Cursor's voice dictation, my prompts get "Thank you" inserted at the end of the sentence.
If you're angry about this then what are you going to do about it?
Make sure to delete VSCode fully from any PC I have access to and annoy all my coworkers to get rid of it.
I would think that the thing to do about it (if you want to use VS Code at all; some people (such as myself) don't), should be to send a patch to prevent adding the Co-authored-by line if Copilot is disabled, so that it will only add that line if the Copilot is enabled.
I really hope the editor wars don't start again. I've been happily using VsCode for years now. More than happy in fact, it's one of the best pieces of software I've ever used, as evidenced by how AI companies basically started as a VsCode fork.

But this is going full-throttle on enshittification.

WTF happened at microsoft (github, openai partnership, copilot pricing) that all this shit just ramped up to a 11?

(comment deleted)
"chat.disableAIFeatures": true
Not sufficient. See the GitHub thread. It is tagging things even when AI features are disabled.
I personally don't mind if an AI inserts it's "Co-Authored by" tag into commits it has worked on - it's transparency, I used its help and it should get credit for good work, or disdain for bad.

But, just inserting the tag because it's being used for git commands - there's a line there.

> it should get credit for good work, or disdain for bad

Hard disagree. The "credit" it gets is through the form of charging my credit card.

Imagine for a moment that you are a company which hired a human developer to create your app rather than AI. In this case, the developer sold his or her right to credit by way of becoming a paid employee. All credit/rights/etc to the code become the ownership of Company, not the developer.

Wonder if they're going to claim copyright interest based on inserting that crap.
(comment deleted)
I got tired of Claude adding their signatures to my commits against my instructions (the settings schema changed at some point), so I added a commit-msg hook that blocks multi-line commits. Easy and works like a charm, and would block this sort of M$ intrusion.

What a despicable behaviour from M$.

My newest yocto image mounts a 640K RO tmpfs on top of $HOME/.vscode-server to prevent people using VSCode from shitting all over the relatively small emmc.
Can you explain how this works? Doesn’t this also stop you from connecting to it over ssh via vs code?
640k … there is something poetic about that number.
One fascinating thing about the whole AI phenomenon is how incredibly hostile it is to _standards_. Whether something works properly, or is ethical, or is true, no longer matters at all; all that matters is "pls use our AI".

Microsoft spent literal decades rehabilitating their reputation. And then set fire to the whole thing in an offering to their robot gods.

And it's not just them. There was a time that Google cared deeply about UX. Now, on macOS Google remaps CMD-G in Google Docs to launch some LLM bullshit (EDIT: huh, they may have fixed this; it was definitely doing it a couple of weeks ago), because, after all, it has only had a standard universal meaning on macOS for about three decades, no big deal.

> There was a time that Google cared deeply about UX

Have we been using the same Google?

It's a complete takeover of technically incompetent management that feels like it can finally execute their ideas to the fullest instead of relying on those pesky swengs with their obstructions, complaints and problems. We'll soon get the management utopia everywhere.
> Microsoft spent literal decades rehabilitating their reputation. And then set fire to the whole thing in an offering to their robot gods.

Probably they thought the new generations forgot about how awful they were in the not so distant past.

I think they set it all on fire because greed got the better of them again.

Its even worse in my eyes, they dont even offer a model they themselves maintain.
Not that surprising when you consider the monumental investments. It's heinous but right in line with modern corporate business ethics.
> Microsoft spent literal decades rehabilitating their reputation.

"Decades" is a stretch. There was a brief window around the Windows 7/8 era and then, like a dog returning to his vomit, they returned to their user-hostile bullshit. Windows 11 is the culmination of that, but Windows 10 was plenty bad. Remember how Windows 10 made Solitaire a subscription service? Sticking copilot into everything is just more of the same.

> Microsoft spent literal decades rehabilitating their reputation.

Mmm... I think I missed that part.

Has always been the case. Corporations hate standards and would rather lock you in except where market forces prevent them. It was a miracle we have something like the internet - and the government had to create it.

Microsoft's decade-long PR rehabilitation has worked wonders for them.

The thing the annoys me the most (to use polite language) is that product design went off the window with the AI craze. You could probably ship actual products that actual people would want to use, but instead everyone wants to turn everything into a chatbot, as if chatbots are the pinnacle of user interface, the crabs of software, the purpose, goal, and telos of technology. It drives me nuts.
Claude code not supporting specifying an alternate location to look for agent skills is another example.
(comment deleted)
Sent from iPhone
What did Command+G do in OSX? Online results are saying it "advances to the next search result after doing find". In other OS', that's just the enter key, if I am understanding the context correctly.
> And it's not just them. There was a time that Google cared deeply about UX

Are we talking about the same Google? They still haven't fixed Android gesture navigation after almost a decade.

Wait, when did they rehabilitate their reputation? Before AI they were already shoving crap down our throats through windows 11.
The entire selling point is "you no longer have to conform to standards in input to get usable output"; why would they conform to standards in output, or in process?
What do you mean, there are many, perhaps too many, AI standards. MCP, SKILLS.md, A2A, two different ACPs, ECA.
This particular change feels... human driven.
GMAIL in the web is so shitty, I literally switched over to another provider. I don't know how anyone can use them as their webmail client. You can't make sense of longer mail threads with forwards, answers etc. in between - it becomes an unreadable hot mess.
Yeah, even .NET is now plagued with AI, see AI dashboard on Aspire, AI components on Blazor, .NET upgrade assistant now being AI agent,....

VSCode hasn't yet been rebranded into VS CoPilot by pure luck.

The industry spent decades preaching us about power savings, with Microsoft settings application lecturing about power saves and the update app programming them on renewables peak, only for... wasting gigawatts by forcing us to have copilot everywhere.

If Microsoft were consistent, which isn't, power saving mode would disable AI features.

> all that matters is "pls use our AI".

If you look at the staggering amounts of money that have been put into the tech, this attitude becomes practically mandatory, in an inhuman sense. They have to get ROI, at literally any cost. And it shows.

> Microsoft spent literal decades rehabilitating their reputation

Which literal 20+ year period was that?

> There was a time that Google cared deeply about UX.

I’m sure Google cares very much about UX as a funnel into their ad brokerage, but was there some time when they cared about it in the user’s interest?

Maybe that magical moment when the results page showed the results first?

> Microsoft spent literal decades rehabilitating their reputation.

TRYING to rehabilitate. only fools fell for it

The pile of money they set on fire is still burning and they are desperate to get returns before it burns out
> Microsoft spent literal decades rehabilitating their reputation. And then set fire to the whole thing in an offering to their robot gods.

When did this happen?

I don't think anyone at Microsoft truly understands how much they have ruined their reputation. This won't be fixed again by open-sourcing a few tools. Fool me once, etc.

I will fight against any Microsoft tooling being used at every company until I die. This is unforgivable.

>There was a time that Google cared deeply about UX. Now, on macOS Google remaps CMD-G in Google Docs to launch some LLM bullshit

That reminds me of a few years ago when Android phones replaced the behavior of "long press sleep/power button" from "shut down" to "ask AI about what's in your screen". Perhaps a manager got promoted somewhere for "raising AI usage" in Android phones.

> Microsoft spent literal decades rehabilitating their reputation

I hated with a passion when people claimed "MS loves open source now". I feel vindicated.

If a corporation can do a 180° turn in one direction, it can do a 180° turn in the other direction just as fast. They did not understand that, either because they didn't want to or because they weren't smart enough to understand how incentives shape behavior.

The incentives or a corporation are roughly making money for "shareholders"[0], making money for the C suite, making money for managers.

[0]: = People who do none of the actual work but have enough money to use it to get more money which therefore goes to them instead of the people doing actual work. (Intentionally saying "get" instead of "make" because they don't "make" anything.)

What use is a reputation if you don’t spend it now and then? If this lets Microsoft cut some divisional headcounts by 95%, certainly their enterprise customers are onboard with naked greed and don’t care about how it looks either — and us individuals aren’t relevant to MS, so why would maintaining our good perception of them matter at all?
Well, that's good news for all the developers working at companies with delusional management proclaiming "100% of code will be written by AI in 6 months"!
Great, here’s how to remove it from your commits:

Run git commit --amend

Your text editor will open. Delete the line: Co-authored-by: Github Copilot <noreply@github.com>

Save and exit

Force push the change: git push --force-with-lease

The original commit is (publicly) preserved on Github.com until perpetuity, so I wouldn't use the term 'remove'.
The day I see it does this is the day I switch to zed, or whatever.
Unfortunately zed is not a complete, finished product in the sense that VSCode is.
Isn’t this a kind of “leopards ate my face” situation? I thought we had all “agreed” that letting AI write code and take control of software repositories is good, even if we have no idea what is going on beyond a thin surface layer, because well it’s fast and we can fix it later and lol who needs testing? My customers are my testers.

And now it’s suddenly bad because the developer is the customer?

The sneaky commit modification is triggered by very modest usage of AI such as auto-completion.

Look, if an agent writes the code and the commit message then adding a Co-authored-by by default is ok. Not even showing it before the commit is made is not, and adding the message when AI was just completing code is not.

(comment deleted)
Microsoft is such a master class in how to make me hate you, quickly.
There is more of it that's going on. For me, Microsoft's SwiftKey keyboard app sabotages the use of a competing search engine (DuckDuckGo) in Firefox in Android for me. When typing a multi-word double-quoted search phrase, it doesn't allow it to be typed correctly.
This is pumping someone's metrics up inside of Microsoft, somewhere.

The question is - will their boss revert it or encourage it when they discover the source of the stats being juiced?

Isn't that someone the person who created the PR? "Product Manager at @microsoft working on VS Code and GitHub Copilot!" it says on her profile
Isn't it also cause they want to tag those commit so that they don't feed it into copilot training?
My first thought when I read this was that it was accidental. But the title of the PR looks like that they aren't even trying to hide it
Wasn’t it discussed here that no copyrights apply to code generated by AI? I’m asking myself whether adding "Co-authored-by: Copilot" means the code is not protected by the GPL, or even allows Microsoft to own your code...