Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

No, copilot in the real world is not the pilot's assistant, it's also a pilot, do the same work as the pilot, takes the commands as much as the pilot and can or cannot be more experienced than the pilot.

In fact, the copilot is just a normal pilot with the only difference that the pilot is also the captain on board, responsible for the police and security on board. And most of the times, companies choose who is the pilot and who is the copilot randomly on a per-flight basis.

So no, you wouldn't a copilot that gives subtly wrong information to the pilot (and vice versa)



sort by: page size:

Perhaps pedantic, but "copilot" in the real world implies something very different from hints and direction.

i mean the word copilot does imply that there is another pilot

copilot might be good at this

Exactly. Copilots are fully-capable pilots who frequently take full control of the plane. It's not an appropriate analogy at all.

Sometimes it is. That's the whole point.

In any case that's not what Copilot does, unless you deliberately make it do that.


Generally, a copilot is someone you can trust. The whole point of having a copilot is to reduce my cognitive load. If I am a pilot and have my copilot fly the plane while I do something else, I may be in charge, but I trust him to fly safely and alert me if things go wrong. A copilot is also a licensed pilot, able to do almost everything the pilot does, he is just not in charge.

The article shows that I can't trust GitHub copilot. So I don't think it is a representative name. Here, it would be more like a servant.


Just like a real copilot in a car or an airplane shouldn't be trusted? Perhaps they should choose a different name then.

Copilot is not a person.

Copilot. FTFY.

Incorrect, if you did what I actually said, which mimics what copilot does.

If copilot is smarter and faster than you, that says more about you than it does about copilot :)

No, you literally said the opposite. Read your first sentence.

> ... Copilot ... is pretty bad at guessing what I exactly want to do


I think Betteridge's Law works just fine here. The answer to the article title is 'no' because Copilot is not just one thing used in one scenario. Depending on what situation you're in and how you use it, it could be a blessing or a curse.

That's the same as what Copilot does.

How is copilot handling stuff like this?

How does it distinguish between people who know how to do the thing and people who use copilot, but are terrible at their jobs?

it specifically says Copilot

You're reading too much into my comment. All I'm saying is that Copilot isn't "learning" like a human does.

Oh I was just chiming in really, not trying to say anything about copilot
next

Legal | privacy