31–40 of 210 posts
What would you rather fight - a horse sized duck, or 100 duck sized horses? Hope he answers that one.
Microsoft should just make Github open source. It would be a great PR move and an amazing build of trust. I don't know why Github was not open source to begin with. Why do companies still think source code is a big deal? This is not Google Search or some advanced AI.
Great PR move? Amazing build of trust? Microsoft bought GitHub for over seven billion dollars. You don't buy something for that kind of cash unless it has that kind of value . Saying they 'should' do something as though there is a problem is silly. Engineers here on HN are so quick to say what someone "needs to do" something... but in response to what? What problem are you identifying? A vocal minority of engineers h…
They simply will be more competitive.
2. They want to improve their "Open Source Friendly" image and they've been taking meaningful steps towards it.
3. Why not? What's the downside of doing so?
> That said, the GitHub team reports that the set of users who have migrated or closed their accounts is extremely small, and this is more than made up for by the surge of new signups and new interest in GitHub this week. It's interesting to hear this. If you were on HN the past week, it might have seemed from all the front page articles that GitHub was about to implode due to an an exodus to GitLab.
"Developers are independent thinkers..." He seems to be playing the typical corporate lackey role. His comments are all full of condescension, platitudes, and corpspeak. He sounds more like a PR person than a principled leader. He's saying exactly what he thinks his audience wants to hear. It's not surprising that he thrived as a Microsoft exec. That he's willing to make promises about GitHub's future is also telling…
Microsoft should just make Github open source. It would be a great PR move and an amazing build of trust. I don't know why Github was not open source to begin with. Why do companies still think source code is a big deal? This is not Google Search or some advanced AI.
I asked: What are your thoughts on how GitHub can incentivize open source work financially? Perhaps by integrating something like Patreon or OpenCollective in the website. It seems that he won't answer it. Still would be awesome if GitHub started addressing this in some way in the future. EDIT: He answered it. https://www.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/8pc8mf/im_nat_friedman...
There's a reason it's AMA and not IAA (I answer anything). Most AMAs like this one are PR stunts, where the "what's your favorite ___" are answered while the tough, controversial qeustions are ignored.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/8pc8mf/im_nat_friedman...
Nat is being really smart here. It should not backfire unless he acts pedantic or insults Redditors intelligence. I think that both are unlikely. Maybe Nat is trying to counteract any PR damage to GitHub, or maybe he just wants to see how much can skyrocket his account's karma. If I was in his situation I will be happy doing it for both reasons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Great PR move? Amazing build of trust? Microsoft bought GitHub for over seven billion dollars. You don't buy something for that kind of cash unless it has that kind of value . Saying they 'should' do something as though there is a problem is silly. Engineers here on HN are so quick to say what someone "needs to do" something... but in response to what? What problem are you identifying? A vocal minority of engineers h…
1. They have great competition in Gitlab. Gitlab's main point is it's open source. They simply will be more competitive. 2. They want to improve their "Open Source Friendly" image and they've been taking meaningful steps towards it. 3. Why not? What's the downside of doing so?
Even if you prefer Android/GitLab, you can't deny that most of the early innovation was copied from iOS/GitHub. In fact, most open source projects (Linux, Firefox, OpenOffice, etc) take their lead from closed source competition... and for all those examples, that competition was Microsoft. That's not to say they can't eventually innovate, however much of the R&D, creation of a marketing, etc come from closed source.
The downside of Open Sourcing so is losing billions of dollars from companies who say "rather than paying $10k/mo, I'm going to just fork it for free".
Lastly, part of the value of GitHub is the network effects. If everyone's hosting it on their own, then there's no network effect.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m more willing to believe the openly viewable GitLab migration tracker, which shows several thousand projects migrated. Just another way Gitlab is nice is the openly viewable statistics versus a generalization. https://about.gitlab.com/2018/06/03/movingtogitlab/
a few hundred thousand repositories of the 85 million reported Github repositories is really not much, see https://github.com/ten at the bottom for the number.