VS Code inserting 'Co-Authored-by Copilot' into commits regardless of usage (github.com/microsoft)

B

bakul

I don't get it. Is the AI actually writing code for you? Or are you using vscode to "set up templates for a C++ project"
Basically, I'm friggin old school, barely younger than dirt, and can't fathom what AI is doing when writing code
 
Espionage724 said:
If you don't want a co-author by AI tag, why use an AI-powered editor? I wonder if some users were quietly withholding AI use?
Click to expand...
A comment from the commit thread: "I am not using copilot, I have "chat.disableAIFeatures" and co-authored by copilot still gets inserted into commits."
 
I haven't upgraded my instance of vscode in a couple of years. based on this discussion I think I made the right decision. I also block network access to the uid running vscode so it cannot phone home. I monitor my firewall and thus far, have seen no leaks. maybe it's time to practice what I preach and ONLY use xterm, a liteweight text editor, and *nix command line utils for everything development related. While I have a github account, it only exists for me to chastise project devs when I see something I don't like in a FOSS project.
 
Just a FYI:
I'm not using editors/zed as my primary editor, but it has an option to completely disable AI features.
I think all AI-featured editors should have this option without exceptions.
screenshot_zed_AI_menu_2026-05-03.png
 
T-Aoki said:
Just a FYI:
I'm not using editors/zed as my primary editor, but it has an option to completely disable AI features.
I think all AI-featured editors should have this option without exceptions.
Click to expand...
Completely disabled should be the default setting, then the user must turn them on.
I've come to detest the AI by default in some tools. $WORK we use Jira, when I want to comment on a ticket or write a description, it's a pain to figure out where to click the mouse so I don't activate AI
 
MG said:
Wasn't that the case without AI already? I never used VS code. Thought it was an online thing that owns everything you make with it. Has it ever been a good idea?
Click to expand...
Unless ALL copyright issues with "ALL data used for learning" are completely resolved (or 100% assure no data without contract nor clear permissions for AI/LLM cases are used), using the AI / LLM has possible but critical risk to be irregal.

And to use generated codes for non-GPL-alike licensed materials (including BSD, proprietary, and others), the LLMs used needs to assure there are not at all GPL'ed (or any license having infectious aspects) data / codes are used for learning. Otherwise, using the LLMs could cause critical risk to be irregal.

So until all of the above (at minimum, but maybe more) are completely resolved, any AI features need to be opt-in to oath to take the riks. This process would need well written warnings to actually opt it in.

Opt-out is still nonsense.
 
co-authored by copilot
Click to expand...

It's the word "authored" that concerns me. Consider the following:
  • I write a piece of software.
  • Let's call the software "my software" just for the sake of argument.
  • I either wrote most (or even all) of the "my software" myself using vi(1) or using Visual Studio using Co-Pilot
  • When I commit the software into GIT the "co-authored by copilot" is added to my GIT commit tag
Who is the "author" of this software?
  • It sounds like/reads like I (DID NOT) write "my software" by myself anymore.
  • Instead "my software" is now defined as having been written (aka 'authored') by "me" AND another co-author named "copilot"
  • WHO is "copilot"?
  • Is that someone with the actual legal given name of "copilot"?
  • (OR) is "copilot" anything that Microsoft wants to define as being "copilot"?
  • If I try to license the "my software" I just wrote (using an Apache, BSD, MIT, GPLx, etc license) am I allowed to do that?
  • (OR) do I have to "ASK" the other author of "my software" (aka 'copilot') for permission to license "my software"?
  • If I (actually decide to license "my software") -- can Microsoft THEN say in (US ?) court that "Hay wait a minute, there is another author of "my software" named 'copilot' -- and the 'copilot' author doesn't want to apply a legal software license (aka Apache, MIT, BSD, GPLx, etc) to the "my software"?
  • This effectively makes "my software" free for everyone to use, completely license free, open source in (at least) when used in Microsoft co-pilot
This is good for "Microsoft", but is it good for "me"?
 
Time for a joke, I am clipper how can i help you ?. Serious the idea is , all your code , will probably be put on a Microsoft server , forever.
You might be legal owner. But you have totally no idea , what Microsoft will do with this code behind the scened. And they will not say what they do...
 
extend, takeover is the phylosofy. So they take openldap, they change it to Active Directory , offcourse incompatible.
Now this becomes the new "STANDARD".
 
CShell said:
When I commit the software into GIT the "co-authored by copilot" is added to my GIT commit tag
Click to expand...
No. This eliminates all subsequent problems. Those who accept these terms know what to expect and won't have to come back later feigning surprise. Co-author at what percentage? 25-75 or 50-50?
 
doul said:
No. This eliminates all subsequent problems. Those who accept these terms know what to expect and won't have to come back later feigning surprise. Co-author at what percentage? 25-75 or 50-50?
Click to expand...
Sorry, but from the linked things in the OP, the coauthor is added to the comment by default, regardless of one actually using copilot to generate anything. That is the problem.

It's the same thing as me writing software, completely by myself, clean room style. I commit it to git hub and the tool adds to the commit message "co-authored by doul" when you had zero input.

If I talk to you, get sample code, get input, you add some lines of code, sure add you add you as coauthor. But you having zero input? No, you don't get credit.
 
mer doul - it is even more evil. When I look at this comment, the deed is done after you wrote your own commit message. Otherwise, the WYSIWYG part would make no sense.
 
bakul said:
Looks like they partially fixed this. See here and here. Until the next time.
Click to expand...

dmitrivMScommented16 hours ago• ​

Thank you all for your feedback, professional or otherwise.
Sorry about the regression. I will work on fixing this in 1.119.
There is a number of issues with the Co-Author functionality:
  • It should never have been enabled when disableAIFeatures is on.​
  • It should not add attribution to changes that were not done by AI.​
  • We need to make sure it receives a more test coverage before change the default.​
If you have additional (constructive) feedback, please ping me directly or open an issue.
Click to expand...


Not very convincing. This is impossible to have slipped past any testing.

And they make it clear that they will change the default again.
 
bakul said:
Looks like they partially fixed this. See here and here. Until the next time.
Click to expand...
And what about the commits already done? They fixed nothing, they stopped doing the thing that got people enraged. What they did is they stopped to widdle from the high board into the public pool. And, as cracauer@ pointed out, they seem to plan on starting it again.
 
"Hey Siri, what's the best way to get people to stop using a product?"
Siri says (and Alexa agrees) "Automatically add AI as a co-author of everything you write, after you write a commit message and even when you turned off all AI features and never used AI to generate anything"

One of my issues, may theoretical, maybe conspiracy, is "you gave me knobs to run this off. How do I know you actually turned them off"
 
Crivens said:
And what about the commits already done? They fixed nothing, they stopped doing the thing that got people enraged. What they did is they stopped to widdle from the high board into the public pool. And, as cracauer@ pointed out, they seem to plan on starting it again.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I should've written "fixed it" instead of fixed it.
cracauer@ said:
This is impossible to have slipped past any testing.
Click to expand...
Of course not. This is to deal with negative publicity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top