Skip to main content

GitHub Copilot–3 misconceptions why people don’t use it

As more as I’m motivating my teams to adopt and integrate GitHub Copilot in their development processes, the more I get push back with reasons why they cannot use it. This resistance often stems from misconceptions rather than Copilot's actual limitations. In this post, I'll address three common misconceptions I've encountered and share strategies for overcoming them. 

Misconception 1: "Copilot produces low-quality and insecure code"

One of the most persistent concerns I hear is that Copilot generates code that's either functionally deficient or contains security vulnerabilities.

While it's true that Copilot isn't perfect, this concern often overestimates the risks while underestimating both Copilot's capabilities and the developer's role in the process:

  • Copilot isn't designed to replace code review or testing practices
  • The tool works best as a pair-programming assistant, not an autonomous coder
  • Recent studies show that developers using Copilot actually complete tasks with fewer security vulnerabilities compared to those not using AI assistance. In case that possible vulnerabilities are still identified in suggested or generated code, Copilot gives a clear warning:

To address this, I would recommend to

  • Experiment with different models: Copilot gives you access to a wide range of models. Experiment and try different models to compare the results. I noticed big differences in the quality of the result depending on the context and model used. (Github Copilot–New models added)
  • Give the model context: Finetune your Copilot experience by providing specific instructions that takes your specific context into account. Our own experiments showed a major increase in acceptance of the suggestions after taking the time to define a good set of instructions. (GitHub Copilot - Custom Instructions)

Misconception 2: "Using Copilot creates Intellectual Property and licensing risks"

Many teams worry that code generated by Copilot might inadvertently incorporate copyrighted code or create legal complications around ownership.

GitHub has significantly evolved Copilot's approach to IP concerns, offers IP indemnification and doesn't use your private code to train the model when using Copilot for Business.

Copilot actively gives you warning

If you want to further minimize the risk, you can

  • Block suggestions matching public code: Copilot includes an option to either allow or block code suggestions that match publicly available code. If you choose to block suggestions matching public code, GitHub Copilot will check potential code suggestions and the surrounding code of about 150 characters against public code on GitHub. If there is a match, or a near match, the suggestion is not shown. (GitHub Copilot–Code referencing)


  • Use content exclusions:  You can use content exclusions to configure Copilot to ignore certain files. When you exclude content from Copilot, content of the affected files will not be used in any way in Copilot.

 


Remark: There is still a general discussion going on if these language models are trained on IP protected content. 

Misconception 3: "Learning to use Copilot takes too much time"

This one I hear the most. Some developers resist Copilot because they believe the learning curve will slow them down initially, negating any potential productivity gains.

While there is a learning curve with any new tool, Copilot's adoption doesn't require a steep learning curve. The basic functionality works out-of-the-box with minimal configuration (It is just autocomplete on steroids).

Some things we did that helped:

  • Develop a library of prompts: Setup your own repository of example prompts or provide a default prompt in your repo (GitHub Copilot– Reusable prompts files).
  • Create a Copilot newsletter: Share and demonstrate new features on a regular basis through short tutorial videos or documentation showing specific examples of how Copilot can help with your codebase.

More information

Github Copilot–New models added

GitHub Copilot–Code referencing

GitHub Copilot - Custom Instructions

GitHub Copilot– Reusable prompts files

Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

Podman– Command execution failed with exit code 125

After updating WSL on one of the developer machines, Podman failed to work. When we took a look through Podman Desktop, we noticed that Podman had stopped running and returned the following error message: Error: Command execution failed with exit code 125 Here are the steps we tried to fix the issue: We started by running podman info to get some extra details on what could be wrong: >podman info OS: windows/amd64 provider: wsl version: 5.3.1 Cannot connect to Podman. Please verify your connection to the Linux system using `podman system connection list`, or try `podman machine init` and `podman machine start` to manage a new Linux VM Error: unable to connect to Podman socket: failed to connect: dial tcp 127.0.0.1:2655: connectex: No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it. That makes sense as the podman VM was not running. Let’s check the VM: >podman machine list NAME         ...
Read more

Cache stampede: when our cache turned against us

While investigating some performance issues, we ran into an ASP.NET Core API that cached a fairly expensive aggregation query for 60 seconds. Under normal load, that was fine: one request rebuilds the cache, everyone else reads from it. Under peak load, dozens of requests would arrive in that same expiry window, all see a cache miss, and all fire the same expensive query in parallel. The database didn't like that. That was the moment when our caching layer stopped helping and started hurting. A burst of requests comes in at the same time, all miss the cache, and all go hammer the database or the downstream API at once. That's a cache stampede . The cache was supposed to protect our backend, and for a few hundred milliseconds it did the opposite. Why this happens IMemoryCache.GetOrCreate (and its async sibling) looks like it protects you, but it doesn't add any locking on its own. Look at the naive version: public async Task<Report> GetReportAsync(string key) ...
Read more

The role of ActivitySource in OpenTelemetry for .NET

While doing some pair programming to integrate OpenTelemetry tracing to a .NET application, we had a discussion on how to use the ActivitySource . It looks simple. You new one up, give it a name, start an activity, done. The discussion started when we added a second ActivitySource with the exact same name in a different class. This made us wonder: "Are we duplicating traces now? Is this a memory leak? Do we need a singleton?" So we decided to dig deeper. This post is what we learned… What ActivitySource actually is ActivitySource is part of System.Diagnostics , not part of the OpenTelemetry NuGet packages. Microsoft built tracing primitives directly into the BCL, and OpenTelemetry's .NET SDK simply listens to them. This is why you can add distributed tracing to a library without taking a dependency on OpenTelemetry at all. An ActivitySource is a factory for Activity objects, and an Activity is .NET's name for what OpenTelemetry calls a span.(don’t ask m...
Read more