Really ads in a terminal is a needless attack vector that is a dumpster fire for security that is part of the reason /why/ they have so many detractors.
NPM Bans Terminal Ads
21–30 of 377 posts
Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads
#22What's this "standard" package anyway? Looks like it's packing eslint with an .estlintrc and... that's it?
Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads
#23Hopefully someone at Canonical takes a hint for Ubuntu’s default motd.
Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads
#24I’m surprised Feross was the catalyst here. From his Youtube Instant days always struck me as the type who appreciated and championed FOSS. Seems he decided that the F in FOSS might be, erm, “reinterpreted,” much the way the notion of “free” has been by modern web companies.
I'm actually curious: what exactly does the "F" mean to you?
Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads
#25Really ads in a terminal is a needless attack vector that is a dumpster fire for security that is part of the reason /why/ they have so many detractors.
Well then maybe they should pay an employee to write their own version of the software.
Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads
#26What's this "standard" package anyway? Looks like it's packing eslint with an .estlintrc and... that's it?
It's apparently an ESLint wrapper that's worth $2000 in console ad revenue.
Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads
#27While I don't particularly like the idea of stuffing ads into npm logs, I don't have the same visceral negative reaction that many people have in these HN threads on this topic. The overwhelming majority of the people complaining about this are well-paid tech workers writing code for well-funded companies that profit off of open source code without providing any reciprocal value to the open source projects in return.…
I hadn't heard of Tidelift before until recently, and I don't see it mentioned here in the discussion. Is this the kind of thing you'd like to see? https://tidelift.com/ Something has to be done to ensure that Open Source which plays a vital role in our business ecosystems remains sustainable. There are real business implications if some package we all depend on is under-funded and implodes (we can all name well-know…
OSS is sustainable. I don’t like how tidelift seems to present a partial story.
If there some OSS crisis that I’m not aware of?
Separately, just because something is an approach doesn’t mean it’s worth talking about.
Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t agree with his problem statement that OSS developers need payment. I think that paying people for valuable work is a good thing. But I don’t think there is a problem with this as evidenced by 50 years of great OSS software written by professional and amateur developers. Saying I spent 4000 hours on a project without pay is not enough info to be useful to determine that I need payment. I volunteer time to lots…
That reasoning makes sense at first. Until you consider the fact that critical infrastructure depends on underfunded open source projects that sometimes have trouble staying afloat. NTP is the classic example of the problem. https://www.infoworld.com/article/3144546/time-is-running-ou... http://www.ntp.org/
If they depend upon it then there are two obvious solutions - provide it doing the work themselves or fund it.
Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads
#29Doing open source without utilising the the code in some form of paid product is a foolish thing to do.
Essentially making someone else rich for free because Software-As-A-Service is seen as the morally superior method of generating revenue.
I'm sure we'll be reading many articles about some open source developer building some critical tool or library utilised by half the world. Only to live near the poverty line.
Whilst companies made millions off of it.
Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads
#30While I don't particularly like the idea of stuffing ads into npm logs, I don't have the same visceral negative reaction that many people have in these HN threads on this topic. The overwhelming majority of the people complaining about this are well-paid tech workers writing code for well-funded companies that profit off of open source code without providing any reciprocal value to the open source projects in return.…
Adware is malware, categorically. I don't give a damn if it's open source. If being adware is the only way software can exist, I'd rather it not exist at all. When those redditor called it sleazy, they were being too gentle.
Adware (and malware for that matter) were actually already banned by npm. Just don't tell feross that. He deleted my comment mentioning that part of the Acceptable Content policy and blocked me from making any more comments on the repo.