It says why in the linked post. People aren't doing open source for free; they do it for the community. But Copilot is there to extract value from it, giving nothing back, not even credit.
Can't open-source programmers improve their own open-source code with Copilot? Does the inherent improvements that all Copilot offers just not apply to people who write open-source code?
I understand that there is a balance, but as an open-source advocate who would love better tools to make their open-source projects better I'm lost as to why this point doesn't counter the "giving nothing back" we hear so often.
Since there's no way to know how code generated by Copilot might be licensed without expensive code-scanning tools, I don't think OSS can safely derive any substantial improvements from it.
If that's the only issue, I can't see the difference when I search for something on the web, copy the code and paste into my solution. There's no attribution, there's no giving back, nothing. Because I'm the community that you are saying the code is supposed to benefit.
Yeah, that sounds like a good definition of someone who is not part of the community. I copy code off Stack Overflow too, but often provide attribution in a comment. But like piracy, it's easier to hunt the whales than the small offenders.
Stack Overflow facilitates the same thing too, so it's an interesting comparison, but SO makes attribution easy and clear, and it actually made it effortless to contribute back.
Like everything in life. Its all about extracting value from someone else who has no control over the exploitation. You only notice when you are the one being exploited though.
As long as some company can improve its bottom line it’s all good though
That's... the exact opposite of a community. Communities are about contributing whatever you can, and taking what you need. There's more joy in giving than taking. Exploitation happens when someone is taking advantage of that tendency to give.
Eventually someone comes in and takes everything that isn't nailed down and then sells it, and that becomes the problem.
