> Hearing feedback from the community following Manson's post and the kerfuffle it generated, Rogers said, has helped him realize that "on reflection," letting Copilot make changes to PRs written by a human without their knowledge "was the wrong judgement call."

Thankfully, they need the community feedback to realize it was wrong. It was so hard to guess it was wrong without the feedback! It's good to know these people are in charge of building Copilot.

▲

pjc50 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> letting Copilot make changes to PRs written by a human without their knowledge

Wait, did they really sneak this in entirely without user interaction? So people trying not to use AI would still risk being ""contaminated""? Incredible breach of trust. Similar kind of thing to lying about whether your product is vegan.

▲

scott_w 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I haven’t seen it but the article makes it sound like, when you ask for it to make a change to your code, that’s the point it puts the ad in.

I think (but not 100% sure) that it also puts it directly into your codebase, without you knowing ahead of time, without your permission. If that’s correct then it’s truly heinous.

▲

heyethan 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

That’s what makes it feel off — not the ads, but the loss of control.

If something can change your PR without you explicitly asking, that’s where it crosses the line.

	▲	7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲

verdverm 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Would be cool if they listened to us about the top voted feedback of all time, re: when the destroyed the feed

https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/66188

▲

kakacik 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

This is corporate PR speak 101, external or internal doesn't matter. None of that sentence is true and everybody knows that.

Its just a theatre since other peers are dancing the same dance and they can't stick out as too rough or honest or whatever. Of course they realized this very well from the start, weighted risk of backfiring, reward for meeting some fucked up quarterly or yearly objective set by higher ups and decided to go ahead.

You can safely ignore the words, just make a mental mark that this is/are sociopathic assholes, move on with life and leave the mark there for next 4 decades and act according to that knowledge the next time you deal with them or their products, if you have to.

	▲	miki123211 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I think a CEO literally saying "I fucked up" on a corporate blog could genuinely be an interesting hiring tactic these days. I'd work for that guy.