Live data from Hacker News

GitHub shuts off access to Aurelia repository, citing trade sanctions

twitter.com

161–170 of 312 posts

Re: GitHub shuts off access to Aurelia repository, citing trade sanctions

#161

GitHub has corrected the issue, restoring our organization access and web site. They have reported that the org was flagged as part of an automated process. The flagging occurred because we have two external contributors from Iran (non GH org members). They told me that there should have been a warning and they are investigating why that didn't happen. The CEO of GitHub also reached out personally to try to speedily…

Thank goodness with git you can just change your remote. This is beginning to sound like YouTube!

Re: GitHub shuts off access to Aurelia repository, citing trade sanctions

#162

Hi HN, I'm the CEO of GitHub. Flagging this account was obviously a terrible mistake, and I apologize to anyone who was affected by it. We're investigating why it occurred and will make changes to make sure it doesn't happen again. I am glad that we restored access to the account in less than an hour after Aurelia filed their appeal. For context on why any account flagging is ever necessary, unfortunately, every comp…

> We are taking the broadest possible interpretation of US sanctions law to allow as much access to GitHub as possible and we are, as far as I know, the only major vendor to offer public repo access in US-sanctioned countries like Iran, Syria, and Cuba.

Does this mean that users in sanctioned countries can create accounts and use the site noncommercially as normal, just as long as they don’t have private repos? It was my understanding that you will nuke ANY account possessed by someone from a sanctioned country.

PS: Please stop doing business with ICE.

Re: GitHub shuts off access to Aurelia repository, citing trade sanctions

#163
post #154

GitLab CEO here, thanks Nat for doing everything you can do to keep open source accessible around the world. We have to comply with the same restrictions and respect greatly that GitHub is taking the broadest possible interpretation of US sanctions law to help users.

[deleted]

Re: GitHub shuts off access to Aurelia repository, citing trade sanctions

#164

Hi HN, I'm the CEO of GitHub. Flagging this account was obviously a terrible mistake, and I apologize to anyone who was affected by it. We're investigating why it occurred and will make changes to make sure it doesn't happen again. I am glad that we restored access to the account in less than an hour after Aurelia filed their appeal. For context on why any account flagging is ever necessary, unfortunately, every comp…

Responses like this are so disgusting to me. It perfectly highlights that the only way to get treated fairly on the system is to be important enough to make the CEO look bad and get a direct response from him.

They have unlimited resources more or less to review sanctions cases, they choose to spend them on buybacks, and executive bonuses, and private jets. They are not ever going to take the time to do this properly because the interests of their users are their last priority.

Sounds like a great time to get off the github platform as soon as possible before your repos dissappear because some iranian guy posted an issue.

Note they didn't mention why they incorrectly flagged the repo or take any responisbility for doing so, or make any claim that it's not going to happen in the future. They just claim it's the government's fault. Bullshit.

Re: GitHub shuts off access to Aurelia repository, citing trade sanctions

#165
post #162

Hi HN, I'm the CEO of GitHub. Flagging this account was obviously a terrible mistake, and I apologize to anyone who was affected by it. We're investigating why it occurred and will make changes to make sure it doesn't happen again. I am glad that we restored access to the account in less than an hour after Aurelia filed their appeal. For context on why any account flagging is ever necessary, unfortunately, every comp…

> We are taking the broadest possible interpretation of US sanctions law to allow as much access to GitHub as possible and we are, as far as I know, the only major vendor to offer public repo access in US-sanctioned countries like Iran, Syria, and Cuba. Does this mean that users in sanctioned countries can create accounts and use the site noncommercially as normal, just as long as they don’t have private repos? It wa…

[deleted]

Re: GitHub shuts off access to Aurelia repository, citing trade sanctions

#166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody should depend on GitHub, especially after it was taken over by Microsoft. If you have any repository on GH, create similar accounts on competing sites such as bitbucket. Also consider services hosted in other countries, since it seems that local political prejudices and propaganda are starting to creep out on the science and technology arena.

"local political prejudices and propaganda" is a fascinating way to interpret "The US list of sanctioned countries."

It's local to the US and it's prejudice and propaganda, so...?

Re: GitHub shuts off access to Aurelia repository, citing trade sanctions

#167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As we've seen with all major internet service providing companies, getting customer service right 100% of the time does not scale. Errors happen. The mean time between errors approaches 0 hours as the ratio of users to human beings on the planet approaches 100%.

Sure, but there's plenty of space between offering Google-level support and getting it 100% right. Aim for 100%, not for Google. It's not their terrible support that made them successful, don't copy that part of their operation.

Setting the tradeoff in cost / effectiveness where Google did is probably part of the alchemy of what made them successful in the way they are successful (though offering better customer service and "white glove" treatment to a smaller customer base is also extremely likely to be a viable business model).

Re: GitHub shuts off access to Aurelia repository, citing trade sanctions

#170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"local political prejudices and propaganda" is a fascinating way to interpret "The US list of sanctioned countries."

It's local to the US and it's prejudice and propaganda, so...?

I think I'd need a citation on why "prejudice and propaganda" applies here. The US doesn't turn to sanctions flippantly (it's not in the US's economic interests, in general, to take a trading partner off the table).
Post reply on HN