Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hello, GitHub

natfriedman.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 671 posts

Re: Hello, GitHub

#391

Post by chemicalcrux »

glorbol wrote: post #371

While Microsoft has a lot of nice marketing and really good PR, they are still a corporation that makes money off selling SQL server licenses and office suite and increasingly by harvesting your user data. Microsoft is addicted to your data. They siphon it off whenever they get the chance, often times by default and without your knowledge or consent. Even their cli Linux tools have """analytics""". This will never ch…

Where is the profit in the """analytics""" you're speaking of? I do not forsee a marketing firm being that interested in all of the ways I can fat-finger shell commands.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#392

Post by chickenfries »

ljm wrote: post #332
Klathmon wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, my biggest concerns are: 1. What is happening to Atom? I have tried VS code and don't really like it due to the difference in how the 2 systems are designed to work (Atom being more "plugins are king", VSCode being more "kitchen sink included by first-party"). I'd hate to see my favorite editor lose it's major backing. If MS makes a commitment to continue to develop Atom, or they work with someone else to "t…

I'm curious if Electron will get a boost of some kind now. Considering how famous/notorious it is, MS could get a hell of a lot of goodwill here if they invest in the tech.

Wouldn't that mostly look like an investment in v8?

Re: Hello, GitHub

#393

Post by maemilius »

wpietri wrote: post #219
RussianCow wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But one could argue that those contributions to git are just to further MS's interests. Of course they are! Everything a corporation does is to further its own interests. Most (large) companies don't contribute to open source out of the goodness of their hearts.

> Everything a corporation does is to further its own interests. This is a common misconception. It's a close cousin of the "increase shareholder value" school of thought, which has widely (and correctly) been called "the world's dumbest idea": https://www.google.com/search?q=the+world's+dumbest+idea We exist in a complex society. It is everybody's job to maintain that society. We do that through things like voting a…

If Microsoft's goal is to become a better corporate citizen, isn't anything they do to progress on that goal "furthering their own interests"?

Re: Hello, GitHub

#394

Post by pbarnes_1 »

adrianmalacoda wrote: post #255
Klathmon wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, my biggest concerns are: 1. What is happening to Atom? I have tried VS code and don't really like it due to the difference in how the 2 systems are designed to work (Atom being more "plugins are king", VSCode being more "kitchen sink included by first-party"). I'd hate to see my favorite editor lose it's major backing. If MS makes a commitment to continue to develop Atom, or they work with someone else to "t…

Fellow Atom user here. According to Lee Dohm, Open Source Community Manager at GitHub, "Atom remains key to GitHub. Our product roadmap is set, and the team will continue all of their work." [0] [0] https://github.com/atom/atom/issues/17454#issuecomment-39442...

Until the deal closes.

Then... who knows.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#395

Post by 8_hours_ago »

nielsbjerg wrote: post #373
8_hours_ago wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Long before the acquisition, we've been hosting important stuff in private GitHub repositories. Including having strategic discussions in those private repositories. Wow! I am very surprised by that. Is that an officially allowed policy? Or is it something that is "don't ask for permission, ask for forgiveness"?

How so? What was going to be controlled, by whom?

I assumed that Microsoft has security policies to ensure that all confidential information (e.g. non-open-source code and strategic discussions) is stored on infrastructure controlled by Microsoft.

The company I work at is very careful about keeping our intellectual property on our infrastructure, and I am surprised that a larger company like Microsoft doesn't have similar policies.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#396

Post by funwie »

Congratulations to Microsoft.

I’ve heard it all after this acquisition was announced. Microsoft is evil, Microsoft will never change, Microsoft is that and this, Microsoft will destroy GitHub.

There are people who see a monster when they hear Microsoft but I bet ask them how they’ve been hurt by Microsoft and nothing will come up.

Is our bias towards Microsoft stoping us from seeing the great work they’ve done in embracing Linux and open source software. Tell me it’s not a big change, and departure from the old Microsoft.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#397

Post by foolfoolz »

glorbol wrote: post #371

While Microsoft has a lot of nice marketing and really good PR, they are still a corporation that makes money off selling SQL server licenses and office suite and increasingly by harvesting your user data. Microsoft is addicted to your data. They siphon it off whenever they get the chance, often times by default and without your knowledge or consent. Even their cli Linux tools have """analytics""". This will never ch…

just a friendly reminder most cli tools you use today that run primarily against a cloud service publish analytics explicitly or implicitly.

you can’t trust MS to not read your code? do you trust amazon to host your binaries? or database? or google cloud? or do you trust no one and rent your own cage and keep it locked?

aws has an entire cloud for US gvoice. they work hand in hand with government requests. google is very tightly coupled as well. do you host entirely on foreign providers?

Re: Hello, GitHub

#398

Post by pbarnes_1 »

foobaw wrote: post #148
ericabiz wrote: post #7

I’m going to be a bit contrarian to “the sky is falling” posts on HN and say: I think Microsoft is handling this really well. 1) They’ve acknowledged the skepticism around the acquisition. 2) They’ve expressed their commitment to keep GitHub an independent platform (like they did with LinkedIn.) 3) Nat Friedman, although I was not familiar with him prior to this, seems like an ideal candidate to run GitHub. This, ove…

Google and Facebook have tons of private repositories hosted on GitHub. I'd imagine it would be illegal for Microsoft to look into them but Microsoft being such a huge company, this acquisition could easily make Google and Facebook nervous.

As far as I know, Google does not host any actually private repos on GitHub. No idea about Facebook.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#399

Post by ljm »

HelloNurse wrote: post #365
ljm wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've felt similar. There's been some impressive innovation from MS in the dev space recently: VS Code is a pleasure to use, Azure wasn't quite as intimidating as AWS can be (but who can blame them, AWS has a lot more legacy). Windows 10 was pleasant to work with, telemetry issues aside. Things are shifting. In fact, I think there's a strong 'once a criminal, always a criminal' mentality that takes a healthy skepticis…

Microsoft has been embracing and extending Git for a while, and now they have bought captive users who are going to use whatever Microsoft tells them to use just to keep their code on Github and avoid a difficult migration. They clearly have greater ambitions than increasing Visual Studio sales. For example, what about forced integration of LinkedIn with personal Github repositories?

I'm not sure what these facts are based on, but to make something clear, 'embracing and extending' is practically the definition of open source and how you contribute. 'Extending' here is a synonym for contributing. Embracing is good, extending and improving is good. You just put Microsoft in there and suddenly it's not. It's stupid.

So in all that, you're waiting on the extinguish step where WinGit comes out and blows away Git, Github, GitLab, BitBucket, etc. etc. etc. because you cannot possibly maintain a modern git repo unless you're running it on Windows. Only MS are building Linux based cloud infrastructure so it's not even loyalty to their past anymore.

Never mind the fact that 'extinguish' blew up in MS' face and their attempts to monopolise the internet ensured they never would. Firefox and Chrome are direct products of that particular power grab, so is the shitty reputation MS has, so is the existence of Edge to get away from the Internet Explorer branding. Why even bother trying all of that again?

Re: Hello, GitHub

#400

Post by himom »

ericabiz wrote: post #7

I’m going to be a bit contrarian to “the sky is falling” posts on HN and say: I think Microsoft is handling this really well. 1) They’ve acknowledged the skepticism around the acquisition. 2) They’ve expressed their commitment to keep GitHub an independent platform (like they did with LinkedIn.) 3) Nat Friedman, although I was not familiar with him prior to this, seems like an ideal candidate to run GitHub. This, ove…

1) That’s called “PR.”

2) They can express whatever they like but keeping their word is optional.

3) How do you know? Have you met him?

Post reply on HN