Earlier quoted context omitted.
well, not anymore, as he's no longer the CEO. Unless you count that as screwing up (which it might well be)
He is CEO through November 14th.
So you are saying there's still a chance?
Thank you, GitHub
191–200 of 460 posts
Re: Thank you, GitHub
#192I'm kinda worried about GH now. I actually worked at MS over a decade ago. They had a pattern at the time which routinely drove their acquisitions into the ground. It went something like this: an acquisition happens, and in order for folks who matter to not jump ship immediately, the acquired company would be allowed to operate semi-autonomously for a while. A year, year and a half sharks from Microsoft proper would…
This one does seem to be different. Github is held at arms length from the rest of Microsoft (like LinkedIn) such that all of this sort of interference can't happen currently. It will be interesting to see if they can keep that up. It is clearly an advantage to have an organization that can think "developers first" and not Azure, Windows, or whatever first.
[Citation needed]
Re: Thank you, GitHub
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
That last sentence alone "if it's so bad why read it?" is clearly something an upset person would say. - But this is HN where inferring tone is apparently a step too far in terms of speculation, so here. Have an ML model tell you how upset you sound: https://i.imgur.com/nztQgdY.jpg
I have no dog in this race but it sounds like you're assuming that a sentence with a negative sentiment (whatever that actually means) must have been created by a person who's upset. A bit of a stretch, no?
A tongue-in-cheek reference to the fact HN users act like basic social skills like the ability to infer tone are voodoo gets dissected like this?
You can't make up this stuff up.
To the reply:
> would not be acceptable in any social setting otherwise
You're close to getting it!
In a normal social setting if someone says "If you don't like X don't interact with it!" that can reasonably understood as a negative statement.
Going "show me where I said I'm upset!!" instead of just clarifying is not acceptable in a social setting. Busting out an ML model is just holding up the mirror.
-
> I am not responsible for how the voice in your head portrays what you read.
I'm not responsible for teaching people how basic social interactions work, yet here we are...
Re: Thank you, GitHub
#194If person's legacy is a list of all the good things (or bad things) they've done during their time, Nat's legacy as the CEO of GitHub can also be summed into a list. Let me get started...I only remember this one thing but other users of HN can help add more I supposed: - That one time when Nat spoke against DMCA law and said taking down youtube-dl was wrong and he actively pushed for their reinstatement. [1] [1] http…
ICE contract?
Nat posted publicly on this topic back in 2019 [0].
[0] https://github.blog/2019-10-09-github-and-us-government-deve...
Re: Thank you, GitHub
#195Heh, heh. Wonder what Microsoft did to piss him off.
Sometimes people just want to move on. No different than engineers seeking greener pastures.
Re: Thank you, GitHub
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
Embrace, extend, extinguish still alive at MS it seems. E: Pointing out proven, explicitly-defined-in-internal-emails tactics used by Microsoft always seems to get downvoted on HN. Why? Would someone like to start a conversation?
Start a new discussion post instead of tagging into the current one.
My comment is in direct response to the parent comment, so no. This is on-topic.
Re: Thank you, GitHub
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have no dog in this race but it sounds like you're assuming that a sentence with a negative sentiment (whatever that actually means) must have been created by a person who's upset. A bit of a stretch, no?
A tongue-in-cheek reference to the fact HN users act like basic social skills like the ability to infer tone are voodoo gets dissected like this? You can't make up this stuff up. To the reply: > would not be acceptable in any social setting otherwise You're close to getting it! In a normal social setting if someone says "If you don't like X don't interact with it!" that can reasonably understood as a negative stateme…
> HN users act [lack] basic social skills
I believe using a sentiment analysis tool you googled for to back up an assumption you made about me and my character would not be acceptable in any social setting otherwise. Just pointing this out. My original comment was made with an informative/inquisitive tone.
I am not responsible for how the voice in your head portrays what you read.
Re: Thank you, GitHub
#198If I read another piece of American corporate crap --- plastic, formulaic, always-be-selling --- I'm gonna throw up on my keyboard. The write-up is rife with stock phrases, and vapid emotionalism. Somewhere when the rest of us are busy there's a room somewhere where people get the cheat-sheet, fill-in-the-blank training that produces this junk. Look the guy probably had some success and met some great people. So why…
I can be subject to similar views at times but here it's just the usual leaving message. Just like on the Firefox release, people should chill out. I guess the global context is getting to people's head.
Re: Thank you, GitHub
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hate to see this downvoted, and glad it got vouched. This is my number one gripe with GitHub and is frequently dismissed as a conspiracy when it is very real. GitHub does nothing because nobody cares, and that's a sad state of affairs.
People can care and not think that version control software providers should start to denying service to governmental agencies.
This is a motte and bailey response. You're right, governmental agencies shouldn't be denied service by Github. I don't think anyone here is denying that statement as is. However, the business ICE conducts, the actions they take against other humans, and the vile, insideous content they post in private facebook groups about it, are something most people would have a problem with if they were aware of it.
Re: Thank you, GitHub
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
You've essentially expanded the definition of "corporate speak" to be "anything a person in a leadership position says"
When you're a corporate leader, the way you speak is by default a form of corporate speak, because as a public figure who is listened to, everything you say is a reflection of the brand.
No. Corporate speak is a specific way of speaking.