Copilot 是副驾驶,不是飞行员:GitHub CPO 谈 AI 不会取代开发者

原标题Copilot Is a Copilot, Not a Pilot: Inbal Shani on the Future of AI in Software Development

Inbal Shani 解释 AI 会改开发者怎么干活,但不会取代人,以及团队该从问题而不是从工具出发去采用它。

LRLenny Rachitsky主持 · Lenny's Podcast
频道
Lenny's Podcast
视频
50:03
阅读
1 分钟
原文
英语
在 YouTube 打开
往下滚动阅读时,视频会缩到右下角继续播放。字幕跟随阅读语言。
阅读语言共 2 种语言可读
简体中文目前只有摘要,下面的完整文稿是英语原文。
摘要

30 秒看懂

GitHub 首席产品官 Inbal Shani 认为,Copilot 这类工具会让开发者更快、更自信,但人必须留在环里,创新和创造性火花无法被替代。她指出被高估的是「生成式 AI 将取代人类」,被低估的是 AI 驱动的测试;公司不该因此裁工程师,也不该从「我们得做点 AI」出发。对谈还覆盖 Copilot 的无摩擦设计、不能只看省时的度量、GitHub Next 如何把三到五年的研究接到生产,以及她在 TomTom 学到的带人过变革。

  1. 1被低估的是 AI 驱动的测试。AI 生成的代码越多,团队越需要覆盖单元、负载、性能、安全和渗透测试的自动验证,而不是更少测试。
  2. 2Copilot 是副驾驶,不是飞行员人必须留在环里,因为 AI 替代不了创新,也替代不了创造性火花。
  3. 3GitHub 称 Copilot 已有超过 3.7 万家组织和 150 万名开发者在用,受访开发者写代码快 55%。Accenture 保留了 88% 的建议代码。
  4. 4公司不能据此裁工程师。省下的时间应拿去写更多代码、喘口气避免倦怠,以及协作和创造性思考。开发者写代码的时间通常不到工作时间的 25%。
  5. 5没有单一的生产力指标。只看时间会奖励写得又快又差的代码,团队应把质量、安全、协作和到价值的时间放在一起看。
  6. 6GitHub Next 能跑起来,是因为它把三到五年的研究接到产品和工程,并且从第零天就想清楚通往生产的路,而不是变成只写论文的内部大学。
全文

按章节阅读完整文稿

01

被高估的是取代人类,被低估的是 AI 驱动的测试

Inbal Shani, who joined GitHub as chief product officer about a year before the conversation, says her core conviction is that developer happiness and productivity depend heavily on the environment and tooling. She notes that AI has become table stakes, with roughly 92% of developers already using AI tools. The overhype, in her view, is that generative AI will replace humans; she argues AI cannot replace innovation or the creative spark, and successful AI still needs humans using tools to generate data. She describes generative AI as a tool, not a solution for everything.

Shani sees AI-driven testing as the most underhyped area in software development. As AI helps teams generate more code and become more productive, testing becomes more critical, not less. She lists unit, functional, load, performance, infrastructure, security and penetration testing as areas where AI could generate larger validation suites. Many testing activities are not even recognized as testing, she says, yet they matter more as every company becomes a software company in some form.

02

Copilot 把开发者从写代码推向系统思考,公司不该因此裁人

Shani repeatedly returns to the line that Copilot is a copilot, not a pilot: the human remains in the loop. The developer's job therefore shifts toward systems thinking, architecture and the connected experience rather than only writing code. She observes that this mindset is already common among senior developers but rarer among juniors. With an AI assistant handling simple code, junior developers can spend more time from the start understanding the system, environment and product they are building.

She also expects hardware development and compute optimization to become more integrated with the software lifecycle. AI has a large resource footprint, and meeting demand will require better CPUs, GPUs and optimized code. Integration with AI will become normal for every developer rather than a specialized skill, and developers will start shaping their thinking around these components early.

The adoption numbers are striking: Shani says Copilot has more than 37,000 organizations and more than 1.5 million developers using it. Survey data she cites shows developers writing code 55% faster, 85% feeling more confident in code quality, 15% faster code reviews, and 88% feeling less frustrated and more focused. She also points to Accenture retaining 88% of suggested code, while the host mentions Shopify having over a million lines of code written by Copilot.

Shani is explicit that companies cannot respond by cutting engineers. Giving developers time back lets them write more code, take a breath to avoid burnout, and spend more time on collaboration and creative thinking. She cites developer-experience research showing developers spend less than 25%—some say less than 20%—of their time writing code, while collaborating with around 21 people each week and handling meetings, builds and legacy code. The goal is to retain and support developers, not to shrink the team.

03

AI 采用失败,往往是因为从工具而不是从问题出发

One common mistake is expecting adoption to happen magically: a company buys a tool and tells people to use it. Shani says organizations need to invest in change management and take people through the transition. The results vary because tools do not fly the same way in every company.

Another mistake is starting from the hype—"What should we do with AI?"—rather than from a customer problem. Shani's product team focuses on the problem first, then asks how AI can help solve it better. That working-backwards approach avoids plastering AI onto everything simply because it is available.

She describes GitHub's own path as an example. GitHub started from the goal of making developers more productive, identified that developers had too many tasks and too little coding time, and then asked which coding work could be automated. That led to incorporating OpenAI and ChatGPT into a tool designed around developer productivity, and she says customers often have a light-bulb moment when they hear this framing.

04

GitHub 在 GitHub 上跑,Copilot 被设计成消失在工作流里

GitHub runs on GitHub, and Shani says the company dogfoods every feature before customers see it. The practice extends beyond engineering: finance uses discussions and pull requests to communicate AR numbers, and legal and HR also use the platform. The product team is an early adopter for capabilities like chat, recommendations and search, testing whether summaries and answers match what they need.

Nothing ships before it has spent enough months cooking inside GitHub, she says. If GitHub cannot use a tool, customers certainly cannot. This internal testing is part of how the company decides whether a capability is working.

The design philosophy behind Copilot follows the same working-backwards logic. Shani says the team put itself in the developer's shoes and asked how the experience should feel; if a tool requires extra steps, asking, or waiting, developers will not adopt it. In 2020, GitHub engineers worked with the design team and OpenAI GPT on the product, with a grounding principle that developers must want to use it. More friction creates more churn and complexity, so Copilot had to be seamless and intuitive.

05

没有单一的生产力指标,只看时间会奖励写得又快又差的代码

Shani says there is no single metric to rule them all. Teams need a combination of measures—code quality, security, productivity, collaboration and time gain—that together point toward developer happiness. The hardest part is defining productivity precisely enough for many different users and workflows.

Different AI features need different success metrics. In GitHub Advanced Security, the right questions are how many secrets were prevented from leaking and how many code issues were found and fixed before shipping. Productivity is not the right metric for every component of the lifecycle.

Time is the easiest metric but also a misleading one, because developers can write bad code very fast. Shani wants teams to translate time into efficiency, productivity and eventually happiness. She suggests "time to value" as a business-facing measure: from assigning a developer a task, how long until the organization realizes the full value in revenue, adoption or time to market?

06

AI 可以成为协作层,小众模型也不会消失

Shani sees sketch-to-app demos as a better collaboration tool than a production tool. Much of the challenge in building software is articulating ideas clearly, so AI can help tell the story of what a developer is being asked to build and reduce back-and-forth about details like button placement or color. She describes Copilot as potentially the best collaboration tool in the market and as a natural-language translator that creates a universal conversation language, much as math once did.

Developers use Copilot in very different ways, and Shani says there is no right or wrong way. She compares AI to earlier abstraction layers: she once worried that Java would take away her job because it bundled functions and libraries, and then Python added another layer. She still writes C when she needs efficient metrics on a very small CPU, but delegates other work to higher-abstraction tools; developers should keep the parts they enjoy and use AI for the parts they do not.

Shani's background is in niche AI, where experts spent years tuning models, building simulations, ingesting data and optimizing outputs. She watched AI become more democratized through conversational systems, but the generative AI boom still surprised her because she had been trained to believe AI required deep expertise. The shift made AI something everyone feels they must use, even if they do not know what AI is.

Her prediction is a hybrid future rather than LLMs as the end state. General-purpose generative models are limited by their training data and by trying to be everything for everyone, while aerospace, automotive and self-driving work will still require delicate, safety-regulated, customized models. She expects multiple LLMs to be combined, each with its own benefit, alongside niche models for specific use cases.

07

创新需要带宽,也需要通往生产的路

Shani credits GitHub's ability to innovate to bandwidth and a culture of failing forward. Teams need room to experiment, and the organization must accept that not every experiment will succeed. Copilot, GitHub Advanced Security and GitHub itself came from this kind of innovative thinking about what future developers will need.

The inputs to innovation are customer conversations, community feedback and open-source foundations running on GitHub. Teams pitch ideas, share research papers, and then GitHub decides how to fund them, allocate bandwidth or run a proof of concept. Innovation also comes from field, product, design and engineering teams, and Shani argues that trying to structure creativity into a fixed 15 minutes a day loses the organic spark.

GitHub Next is the company's research team of applied and research scientists looking three to five years out. They write papers, run experiments and build proofs of concept, with the job of inventing the future of software development. Copilot emerged from that team.

Shani says GitHub Next has avoided the fate of some corporate innovation teams because it has the right people and mindset, freedom, and a path to production from day zero. Failed innovation teams can become universities that write papers without shipping, or they get used too tactically and become another product team focused on the next six months. GitHub keeps a strong two-way relationship between GitHub Next and the product team so future thinking becomes real.

08

产品领导力是系统思考和影响力,变革必须把人带上

Shani describes the chief product officer role as broader than being head of product. A CPO needs business thinking, go-to-market strategy, sales play and an understanding of how engineering builds products. The job is less about writing requirements or painting a vision than about how all the company's components operate together.

She learned systems thinking from her first boss in aerospace: not just tuning one filter, but seeing how it connected to the control system, ignition and final display. She also emphasizes influence, because product managers must influence engineering to build and revenue teams to sell. She advises learning from leaders above, peers across the company, and people you manage, adopting skills that are missing from your own toolbox.

In the podcast's Failure Corner, Shani reframes failure as learning. Her biggest learning came early in her leadership career at TomTom, leading the location-based services team: she arrived with a go-go-go mindset and tried to fix everything without building understanding of why change was needed. The team told her she was moving too fast and needed to explain the why, and she also had to adjust her style to an international culture. She learned that being hired to drive change does not mean the team is automatically on board; a leader has to take people through the journey.

In the lightning round, Shani says she asks candidates about the most innovative thing they have done and why they consider it innovative, and about a time they disagreed with a manager and what they did. Those questions reveal character, willingness to stand ground, communication and influence. Her life motto is that if you do not take risks, you cannot create a future; comfort is not the goal, and stretching yourself means feeling uncomfortable.

同频道的其他文章

1:10:27EN → 简体中文
Lenny's Podcast播客 · 2 人对谈硬技能让你进门,软技能决定你能走多远嘉宾 Jules Walter · 主持 Lenny RachitskyYouTube 产品负责人 Jules Walter 把 PM 能力拆成 IQ 与 EQ,并讲怎样用最小请求找到导师、把反馈变成习惯。产品与体验Product ManagementLeadership+3
1:30:46EN → 简体中文
Lenny's Podcast播客跳过「末日漏斗」:Cursor 招顶尖 50 人的打法主持 Lenny RachitskyCursor 人才负责人 Adam Ward 讲如何界定角色、画出全球大约 50 人的名单,再持续追他们,而不是招漏斗里活下来的人。企业与战略Company BuildingLeadership+3
1:42:04EN → 简体中文
Lenny's Podcast播客 · 2 人对谈先做生命体征测试,再谈把付费增长拧到最大嘉宾 Timothy Davis · 主持 Lenny RachitskyShopify 绩效营销负责人 Timothy Davis 讲何时开始买量、怎么做小测试、测哪些平台、看什么指标、以及先招什么样的人。企业与战略Go-to-MarketGrowth Strategy+3
1:21:44EN → 简体中文
Lenny's Podcast播客从划桨到掌舵:OpenAI 如何把 Agent 做成持久共事的同事主持 Lenny Rachitsky负责 Codex 与 ChatGPT Work 产品的 Tara Seshan 解释:当 Agent 负责划桨、人负责掌舵时,产品经理的工作会变成什么样。智能体Product StrategyAI Product Management+3
1:01:00EN → 简体中文
Lenny's Podcast播客 · 2 人对谈谁掌握注意力:Substack 如何按「控制权」做产品嘉宾 Sachin Monga · 主持 Lenny RachitskySubstack 产品负责人 Sachin Monga 讲路线图背后的原则、Recommendations 如何长成增长引擎,以及他认为互联网写作的下一阶段会怎样。产品与体验Product StrategyGrowth Strategy+3
1:26:22EN → 简体中文
Lenny's Podcast播客先从小处开始,再挣来自主权:五十多次企业 AI 落地教会他们的事主持 Lenny RachitskyAishwarya Naresh Reganti 和 Kiriti Badam 解释,为什么 AI 产品需要另一套构建流程,以及怎样一步步提高 Agent 自主权而不丢掉客户信任。产品与体验Product StrategyAI Product Management+3