anon2020dot00

Open AI Da Vinci playground is the closest there is at the moment

df

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

There's no sign that he is lacking in incentive/incompetent/lack of experience, in fact, he mentions that he is actively making it known to his teammates that he has spare time and is not loaded during meetings.

He hasn't mentioned any struggles to deliver or challenges with his past tasks; it just comes across that he is much less busy than his peers and he is wondering why. Maybe he is not liked and that's why I mention freezing him out, I guess one can classify that as a "communication issue" or the other possibility is that it just takes time to be integrated in a big company like other commentators have said.

By freezing-out, I don't mean that his teammates are actively hostile against him but just that maybe they don't trust him yet to give more tasks, just like how any newcomer is treated with some unfamiliarity at the start. I guess that counts as a "communication issue".

You seem to like to point the blame at the employee only while others have mentioned that it just takes time to build trust and to be given tasks and others have mentioned that he might have already lost the trust of his teammates which I guess does point to a failing in his part if so.

In a big company, there is also usually more room to coast and that is another possibility in that the manager is just not pushing that much and that is normal for a new-hire. I think there are just more possibilities than the fact that the employee is incompetent which seems to be your immediate conclusion without sufficient evidence.

He is 6 months on the job. He doesn't know the proper context of the business and it is normal and expected to be handheld at the start. If he was already at some length in the company, then it would be normal and expected that he would be able to come-up with his own initiatives and ideas on how to improve the product beyond the directions that the superiors give-out.

At this point, he is being frozen-out by his teammates or maybe it is just normal ebb and flow like usually newcomers take some time to be integrated in a big company but it depends.

Your talking more about your experience rather than what the OP is saying. The OP is saying that he is not immature and he is not content to browse the internet and that he is trying to be autonomous but since he is not the product owner, it is unlikely that he will find ways to make the product better.

Your message sounds like a spiel from a CTO given to his employee in order to motivate them and it's like you used this opportunity to practice a spiel that you have to give instead of looking at the OP's situation.

My idea is that there is a market for community-curated spaced repetition decks. Many people want to learn the same things such as a foreign language or a programming language.

The difficult part is creating a deck and crafting the answers and questions. Because usually this is a time-consuming process. So if it was a community-effort then it would be a win-win.

This is probably not an original idea and if anyone knows already where to find such decks, that would be cool.

Interesting question, and it really boils down to "given what you know now, what would you have done differently in the past?"

Most regrets stem from poor information or prediction capability such as the story of the one that went into game development during college instead of a better course or the one that didn't focus on programming until late in life.

I think the biggest regrets doesn't come from lack of prediction or information but just from the lack of willingness to take risks.

Life is finite and so whether we take risks or not, we all end-up in the same place; but to those who took risks and it paid-off, the journey is much more pleasant and the reckoning at the end is much more fruitful.

Of course this is just a platitude and isn't really that helpful, since there are a lot of risk-takers that just end-up dead or worse-off.

But the idea is that a person can't win by not taking risks since we're all dead anyways and so maybe a calculated risk is the answer.