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

GitHub is now free for teams

github.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 664 posts

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#611

Post by hiram112 »

girvo wrote: post #529
hiram112 wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We all know that the most vocal on the left, who want to silence anyone who doesn't pander to their political ideals, pressure public companies, advertisers, etc. to 'cancel' those who refuse to go along - drop their advertising, cut off their servers, purge their DNS, ban their accounts, shame them relentlessly until they disappear. Most US companies these days have no morals, and are easily influenced by these tact…

Sure, but that "lot of us" out there is a much smaller and usually much rowdier group of users that time and time again companies have been happy to wash their hands of. You're not profitable enough (and I'm not even getting started on the morality or ethics side of this).

I have assumed that many tech companies, especially in California and other liberal strongholds, hold this opinion. Like I said, they live in their insular bubbles, and imagine that the rest of the country is either deplorable and poor or they share their views.

Meanwhile, I work in a relatively conservative industry that also happens to have one of the largest budgets of any 'company' in the world. I have seen first hand when vendors were being evaluated for multi-million (or even billion) dollar projects, both Google and Github being crossed off the list without a second thought due to some of the publicly made political statements and actions of their executives and employees.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#613

Post by Kliment »

alex_young wrote: post #526

Compare this with Microsoft’s other notable purchase of recent years, LinkedIn. At LinkedIn they are tightening all of the screws and extracting cash from all comers. What is different about GitHub? My guess is GitLab. This is an old strategy for Microsoft. They used to call it Embrace, Extend, Extinguish.

Linkedin was always a predatory organization, and now they are empowered to do what they actually wanted to do without the risk of going bankrupt if they miscalculate. Github is also empowered to do what they actually wanted to do without the risk of going bankrupt if they miscalculate. This is what you end up. You can't fundamentally change an organization by acquisition without destroying it. For example, Skype was destroyed like that. Github and Linkedin were not, and you are seeing them acting with fewer constraints. Linkedin is using their newfound power for evil, Github much less so.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#614

Post by judemelancon »

MrStonedOne wrote: post #592
yellowapple wrote: post #549

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can see how GitHub wouldn't want a public repo to have objectionable words I can't. Does GitHub really have nothing better to do than to play nanny cop because I used a naughty word in my code? Are brainfuck interpreters now off-limits? How about drivers for teledildonics hardware? Or libraries specifically for detecting and filtering swear words? Or maybe I just want to vent a bit in a comment every once in awhi…

We named our meatballs a old british name. This was why we got nuked. If only we knew that 4 days ago when we first got banned, and not, well, 4 days later. The issue is github works by report only. You can do what ever you want in a github repo, but if you make a video game on github, and ban the wrong person, they can just go through your repo and look for ToS violations to troll you. We are literally removing the…

Is the image, purportedly of a search of the codebase, in this post falsified? https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=26318#p554...

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#615

Post by jsmith45 »

jedieaston wrote: post #258
harikb wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slightly off topic, but I would like to request that you open Github for Education [1] for pandemic-related home-schoolers. Currently it requires verification as an accredited school & credentials. Any help is appreciated. [1] https://education.github.com/schools

When I signed up for the Student Dev Pack originally in HS, the school district's evil IT department blocked mail from outside domains for whatever reason, so I sent GitHub a picture of my schedule (which had the name of the school and my name on it), and they accepted it. If you have evidence of being a home schooler (I believe there's some paperwork you have to file with the government?), they'll probably take it t…

It was open source, but they have now closed it off, although the old source archive is still available.

See https://github.com/education/classroom/commit/a824a057b939c0...

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#616

Post by Keats »

natfriedman wrote: post #26

Hi HN, I'm the CEO of GitHub. Everyone at GitHub is really excited about this announcement, and I'm happy to answer any questions. We've wanted to make this change for the last 18 months, but needed our Enterprise business to be big enough to enable the free use of GitHub by the rest of the world. I'm happy to say that it's grown dramatically in the last year, and so we're able to make GitHub free for teams that don'…

Can making Github Actions share code between them be a super high priority? Copy/pasting all the setup for a project on each action is repetitive and any time you need to make a change, you need to make it in 6-7 places in our case.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#617

Post by Guest42 »

brian_herman wrote: post #610
ss3000 wrote: post #563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All I really want is to hear an explanation from Nat Friedman, CEO of GitHub, the human being, who said he wouldn't pull resources away from Atom development and then evidently did so soon after, to end all this needless speculation once and for all (and what you've suggested in your comment is still speculation, however plausible it might seem to you). It offers very little solace to the few Atom users still hanging…

Why does he owe you an explanation for a product that was free? Its posts like this that convince him that open source isn't worth contributing to.

Nothing is free. Accountability matters.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#618

Post by bananabreakfast »

brian_herman wrote: post #610
ss3000 wrote: post #563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All I really want is to hear an explanation from Nat Friedman, CEO of GitHub, the human being, who said he wouldn't pull resources away from Atom development and then evidently did so soon after, to end all this needless speculation once and for all (and what you've suggested in your comment is still speculation, however plausible it might seem to you). It offers very little solace to the few Atom users still hanging…

Why does he owe you an explanation for a product that was free? Its posts like this that convince him that open source isn't worth contributing to.

Gosh, you have completely misunderstood the point of this comment.

The comment is not asking for an explanation about supporting an open source product.

They're asking for an explanation about promising continuing support for something and then apparently doing nothing to back that claim up.

You seem to be implying that integrity in public statements should only apply if you're referring to non-free commercial software.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#619

Post by cactus2093 »

recursive wrote: post #294
cactus2093 wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SAML is pretty simple, it just uses XML which I think turns people off to it by default. I've implemented it once and I feel like I have a decent handle on what it is (though maybe I've just avoided the worst edge cases). OAuth is way more complex, I've used it countless times and still get confused by it. It has more complex patterns like having a separate resource server and authentication server, it's used for mor…

> SAML is pretty simple, it just uses XML which I think turns people off to it by default. I've implemented it once and I feel like I have a decent handle on what it is (though maybe I've just avoided the worst edge cases). I once tried to implement it, and found that the specification was spread across ~500 pages of dense PDFs. I find it to be complex.

Well, relatively simple. If you added up the number of pages in the specs for http, html, css, ecmascript, and all the various apis that web developers use every day it would likely be hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of pages. That doesn't seem like a particularly useful metric, because you don't have to read and understand the entire spec to use a technology.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#620

Post by samanthalee233 »

Someone1234 wrote: post #129

I think GitHub are doing well, but one cannot deny that GitLab has carved out a fantastic niche (on-prem, private instances, OSS, etc) that GitHub doesn't compete in. So while I agree GitHub are "the" company to beat, I think GitLab is doing a good job of contrasting. PS - No affiliation with anyone.

GitLab community advocate here, wanted to see if you're interested in participating in our #GitChallenge - If you send us your review of GitLab vs GitHub (whether positive/negative/neutral), we'll send you some swag. Here's some more info if you're interested! https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2020/04/14/github-free-for-tea...
Post reply on HN