GitHub is now free for teams • Hacker News Board

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#661

Post by momokoko » Sat, Apr 18, 2020, 9:34 PM UTC

dang wrote: post #660

momokoko wrote: post #659

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi Dan, my apologies for that. I wasn't trying to specifically single out that account. I've seen a strong push for MS products since VS Code, and it is impossible to be an accident. My post was made out of curiosity as opposed to malice. It was not intended as a passive-aggressive accusation, but I understand the rule there. I appreciate the guidance.

Appreciated! I'd be super careful about thoughts like this: > and it is impossible to be an accident Internet users are overwhelmingly, like a million times too likely to generate sinister explanations for phenomena like this, which are typically just artifacts of a large population size plus randomness. There's something in how human nature meets the internet which makes us vulnerable to this bias. Probably it's jus…

I think there might be a mixup about how it might appear that I'm talking about astroturfing. I'm referencing a situation where one or more marketing teams have leveraged their large employee and contractor network to engage positively with Microsoft's listed products and services on HN. More of a mobilize from within as opposed to a secret or stealthy program to create false accounts.

Quick edit: I definitely appreciate the "red car effect" you are referencing.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#662

Post by specialist » Thu, Apr 23, 2020, 3:17 PM UTC

jedieaston wrote: post #306

specialist wrote: post #34

What safe guards are in place to prevent Microsoft from using GitHub to glean competitive intelligence? Just like Facebook used Onavo. https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebooks-onavo-gives-social-me...

The same safeguards that are in place on Azure (which is used by 99% of Fortune 500s for either Office 365 or cloud stuff), which is to say, ethics, and the fact that if they tried it once most of those companies would reduce their spend with Microsoft immediately. Not to mention the government contracts.

Followup:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/amazon-scooped-up-data-from-its...

Surely they wouldn't also spy on their own cloud customers.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#663

Post by dserodio » Thu, Apr 23, 2020, 8:43 PM UTC

tracker1 wrote: post #454

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The YAML configuration is something I have to learn that provides no value-add outside of GitHub. If it was at least based on Docker, you could re-use existing technical knowledge or teach people something that's valuable in other contexts.

A lot of things use YAML for configuration... what would you prefer for configuration? XML?

HCL, which is what GitHub Actions used when it first launched

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#664

Post by sneak » Thu, Apr 23, 2020, 10:25 PM UTC

K0SM0S wrote: post #207

irrational wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can it really be called a conspiracy theory when there is proof that MS has done this same sort of thing in the past? Past behavior is a good predictor of future behavior. Saying that someone has been shown to do something in the past, therefore it is likely that they will do the same thing in the future doesn't seem to qualify as a conspiracy theory.

The real question is whether corporations behave like "someone", like a natural (biological, real flesh-and-blood) person. Whereas there is a need for legal corporate personhood (so they can enter contracts, be sued and sue others, etc), the extent to which a corporation has a "personality" is very much debatable— sign contracts, sure; but fund political candidates? Have a political opinion even? That's crossing a bi…

Doing that can get you banned from a lot of projects on GitHub. Citing specific humans by name as having undertaken specific actions on specific dates is sometimes seen as aggression or harassment, even if you stick to pure factual statements. The actions of people at work, socially, are often seen as “actions of the company”. Mentioning people by personal name is frowned upon.

I’ve actually had comments deleted for discussing things in this mode: Human X did thing Y.

I think our society doesn’t like it when we highlight personal responsibility for things people are only choosing to do to get a paycheck to pay their bills.

It’s easier for everyone involved to say “Google developed AI software that allowed military drones to decide who to kill” than to say “John Smith developed AI software that allowed military drones to decide who to kill”.

Not that I think we should not use both forms. Individual choices matter, and facts are facts.