GitHub Copilot is now available for free

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Free Tier Details & Usage Limits

  • New free GitHub Copilot tier in VS Code includes ~2,000 completions and 50 chat requests per month.
  • Many full‑time developers consider this far too low (“a few days” or “one day” of use); hobbyists or occasional coders may find it sufficient.
  • Several see it as “shareware” or a funnel to upsell Pro, not a truly free professional tool.
  • Some developers plan to downgrade/cancel paid plans but keep using the free quota opportunistically.

Copilot vs Cursor, Windsurf, Codeium & Others

  • Numerous users say they switched from Copilot to Cursor or Windsurf and find those significantly better, especially for:
    • Multi‑file edits and patch application.
    • Inline multi‑line edits and “edit around cursor” behavior.
    • Faster, more relevant autocomplete.
  • Others argue Copilot Edits and chat+edits are improving and closing the gap but still feel clunky or unreliable for large refactors.
  • Some feel Copilot remains “glorified autocomplete” compared to more agentic tools.
  • A minority report opposite experiences: local tools or alternatives like Continue felt worse than Copilot for them.

IDE Ecosystem & Workflow

  • Strong divide between:
    • VS Code / Cursor / Windsurf users, who praise rapid AI integration and multi‑file agents.
    • JetBrains users, who value superior navigation, refactoring, debugging, and tooling, and bolt on AI via Copilot, Cody, CodeGPT, etc.
  • Several keep two tools open: one “real IDE” (JetBrains, Visual Studio) plus an AI‑centric editor (Cursor/Windsurf/Zed).
  • Vim/Neovim users rely on plugins (copilot.vim, CopilotChat, Continue, CodeCompanion) but feel still behind Cursor‑style experiences.

Privacy, Training, and Licensing Concerns

  • Many worry Copilot free tier is partly about harvesting more proprietary code for training.
  • Settings default to allowing use of editor code snippets for “product improvements”; some are uneasy even with opt‑out, citing policy changes and vague language.
  • Strong objections to:
    • Training on public code without explicit consent.
    • Terms that forbid using Copilot outputs to train competing AI systems.
  • Some developers have left GitHub entirely or moved to “no AI” forges and self‑hosting.

Local & Open Models

  • Active interest in local or BYO‑API setups: Continue + Ollama, Tabby, Cody+Ollama, Qwen2.5‑Coder, StarCoder, Llama, Gemma, etc.
  • Debate over tradeoffs:
    • Local models: more control and privacy, but slower, require hardware, often weaker than state‑of‑the‑art cloud models.
    • Cloud SOTA (Claude, GPT‑4/4o, Sonnet): better quality and large‑scale edits, but proprietary and metered.

Impact on Work, Quality, and Jobs

  • Some report huge productivity gains (rapid test generation, boilerplate, sweeping UI or config changes).
  • Others find AI‑heavy codebases chaotic: inconsistent style, duplicated patterns, subtle bugs, and dependence on agents for any nontrivial change.
  • Broader skepticism: AI may accelerate sloppier software, erode skills, displace workers, and concentrate power and knowledge inside a few vendors.

Market & Strategy Views

  • Several see Microsoft’s move as classic “embrace, extend, extinguish”: bundling Copilot with GitHub/VS Code to starve startups.
  • Others predict eventual price hikes once dominance is secured.
  • Some believe AI tooling is overhyped, unprofitable at current costs, and may see a correction when returns and maintenance burdens become clearer.