This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Can this guy really be considered a CEO if GitHub is a fully owned subsidiary of Microsoft?
You know Microsoft, the company that is heavily invested in OpenAI and is spending hundreds of billions to try to make AI happen?
He probably spent millions of his owe money on AI stocks.
Considering he's a Microsoft employee and Microsoft is leaning hard into the AI craze? His stock options are all dependent on this lol
This makes me want it to fail harder.
Does github copilot include attributions and licenses from projects it copy paste code from or it's just stealing and pretending like nothing happened like all other AI ?
Would AI be better CEO's? They would cost a lot less and probably make better decisions. Just saying.
A CEO's main job is to spout bullshit, which is also AI's particular talent.
Moved from github to gitlab when it was acquired by Microsoft. Moved from gitlab to codeberg last month because I don't need a behemoth with dozens of services I never use to store my 3 shitty code files.
If those are my two options...start looking for my projects on Codeberg I guess.
Way ahead of you, looked for GitHub alternatives such as codeberg ages ago.
I have a lot of projects, many OSS and some private. I self host forgejo for my private stuff and also have a lot of my oss there.
Still, I currently use GitHub as my main git service, since it's the most polished code forge and their ci servers are free and fast as fuck. The only other thing keeping me there is the network effect in the sense that I like my projects to be more discoverable, not that anyone gives a shit about my code besides a few friends and randos.
If they get annoying, it's trivial to move. I got the infrastructure set up, and forgejo federation is coming.
This is [...] a strange marketing strategy by AI companies. Instead of selling products based on helpful features and letting users decide, executives often deploy scare tactics that essentially warn people they will become obsolete if they don't get on the AI bandwagon.
Very insightful for me to read this. If AI in its present state was as useful as it is advertised, it wouldn't need such apocalyptic language.
Risky talking down to developers. Does the CEO not know that Git is like REALLY easy to move?!
Oh I'm already out, but only of your shitty products.
Aight Imma head out
Guy who runs waning AI service (Copilot, currently being eaten by Claude Code and Qwen Coder) says use his AI service or you’ll be out of a job.
They are so desperate to push this and it's pretty obvious why. Companies have dumped hundreds of millions of dollars into AI like it was going to revolutionize literally everything and are now forcing it on people to make up for the fact that they were wrong. Don't get me wrong, AI has its uses, but their whole "solution for everything" mentality is really starting to backfire and they are just trying to make a profit off their investments. Basically "we spent way more money on this than we should have so you better use it or else."
Edit: In addition, every company is trying to be the one that's on top when the bubble pops which is only making it bigger and last longer which will only make it worse when it does actually pop. It's a problem they created and are sustaining themselves, and if they back out now it could be just as catastrophic as letting the bubble pop.
I'm a professional developer and have tested AI tools extensively over the last few years as they develop. The economic implications of the advancements made over the last few months are simply impossible to ignore. The tools aren't perfect, and you certainly need to structure their use around their strengths and weaknesses, but assigned to the right tasks they can be 10% or less of the cost with better results. I've yet to have a project where I've used them and they didn't need an experienced engineer to jump in and research an obscure or complex bug, have a dumb architectural choice rejected, or verify if stuff actually works (they like reporting success when they shouldn't), but again the economics; the dev can be doing other stuff 90% of the time.
Don't get me wrong, on the current trajectory this tech would probably lead to deeply terrible socioeconomic outcomes, probably techno neofeudalism, but for an individual developer putting food on the table I don't see it as much of a choice. It's like the industrial revolution again, but for cognitive work.
I'm finding AI effectively automates entry level jobs and interns. The long term implications is very few will be able to enter the field. What do we do when all the experienced engineers retire? How will we shift our economy to work for everyone under this model?
If they intend to pay me the same amount to work slower and think less, that's their choice and I will be happy to help them out pursuing it. ChatGPT, explain to my boss how I'm using AI for everything I work on now.
I got out when Microsoft bought it, glad I did. I don't want you training your shitty AI on my shitty code.
TIL Github has a CEO.
I've always hated GitHub glad to see it finally is going to crumble
