zlacker
[parent]
[thread]
4 comments
1. tines+(OP)
[view]
[source]
2025-05-19 22:15:53
As with all good marketing, the conclusions omitted and implied, no?
replies(1):
>>n2d4+kg
◧
2. n2d4+kg
[view]
[source]
2025-05-20 00:35:10
>>tines+(OP)
The implied conclusion ("Copilot made 1000 changes to the codebase") is also not survivorship bias.
By that logic, literally every statement would be survivorship bias.
replies(1):
>>tines+tp
◧◩
3. tines+tp
[view]
[source]
[discussion]
2025-05-20 02:10:48
>>n2d4+kg
That’s not the implied conclusion my guy. That’s the statement.
replies(1):
>>n2d4+jr
◧◩◪
4. n2d4+jr
[view]
[source]
[discussion]
2025-05-20 02:34:13
>>tines+tp
Then what do you claim the implied conclusion is?
replies(1):
>>Jenk+5P
◧◩◪◨
5. Jenk+5P
[view]
[source]
[discussion]
2025-05-20 07:20:00
>>n2d4+jr
That the number of successful (as in, merged and works) contributions are greater than those that did not.
[go to top]