The issue as described by the original poster was that the code was not executed but displayed. They read it and understood how it works. This set them on a trajectory to try it themselves. This is how they started. Maybe a book was involved at a later stage.
Sure, you can argue that they were not supposed to read the code, so they shouldn't have. But without some tangible harm I don't see why we're supposed to disapprove of it. Maybe allow some hacker spirit while posting on Hacker News :-)
Re:GitHub Copilot investigation
by bamboozled on Wednesday October 19, 2022 @08:56PM
(#33269670)
I’ve done similar things in the past so I said I’m not judging them, but after some time working with computers myself I’ve become more compassionate and I think the better thing to do is help a fellow sys admin and report the problem. That’s the hacker spirit.
Either way, I still think you're in the wrong, kind of like checking out a naked person getting changed because they accidentally left their blind open. It was available, maybe it was clever, but it's a strange way to learn how to code. Why didn't you just buy a coding book, or borrow some from the library ? Was the code really of good quality if the server was configured so badly?
Obviously we have a difference of opinion and that's ok.