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

Faker.js is now a community controlled project

fakerjs.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 357 posts

Re: Faker.js is now a community controlled project

#61

Post by chaostheory »

przemelek wrote: post #26

Hmm, but as I understand original developer was rather pissed off by situation when devs are working on projects in theirs own time, and those projects sometimes become important tools to lower costs of creating software for big companies, and authors are not getting a dime and are forced to use some kinds of sponsorship and so on.... In such case making one of tools "community" owned smells like some kind of dick mo…

I've already posted this before, but what Marak has done is anything but reasonable. If anyone was being a "dick", it was him.

If he just wanted corporations to pay, there are plenty of other alternatives like changing the license for future versions like SugarCRM did. It's been years since they've done that and they have plenty of customers.

https://sugarclub.sugarcrm.com/engage/b/sugar-news/posts/sug...

Since the developer in question has been acquired in the past (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nodejitsu), he could also make it into a SAAS play. He has the connections, skill and experience.

Otherwise, he can just walk away like everyone else. Maliciously changing code to break people's stuff is uncalled for. If he wanted to charge people from the start, then maybe he shouldn't have used the free for all MIT license for his code? If you want more restrictions on usage, choose a more restrictive license. Here's one of many restrictive licenses that changes depending on who's using the software

https://writing.kemitchell.com/2021/06/15/Big-Time-1.0.0.htm...

Fakerjs is also not completely original work. It's a port of a Ruby library which is also named Faker. That Ruby library is also likely a port of a Perl library that is also named Faker. I haven't read anything about Marak even mentioning to support those projects financially.

On a related note, Marak is not well mentally which helps rationalize what he did

https://www.qgazette.com/articles/more-charges-possible-for-...

"A team of NYPD investigators and FBI agents found potassium nitrate, which is used in fertilizer, metal containers, fuses and other bomb-making materials in the crate, along with printed bomb-making and survivalist materials and a book on how to make a bomb scattered throughout the home, the source said."

“'The chemicals separately are what they are, but taken together they can assemble an explosive device,' NYPD Dep. Commissioner of Intelligence and Counterterrorism, John Miller, said. 'There were books about military explosives, booby traps and other things.'"

I could be wrong, but Marak purposely trying to sabotage other people's projects was a precursor to him attempting to hurt people in real life. This was not reasonable behavior from a sane person. He should not be getting this much support from so many people on HN.

Re: Faker.js is now a community controlled project

#62

Post by lkapl »

ognarb wrote: post #4

> After the funds were moved we were invited to become admins of the Faker collective. This meant that we retained the existing sponsors of the Faker collective who were paying for the continued maintenance of the project. I'm sorry but this feels wrong. The existing sponsors should have their subscriptions cancelled, instead of going to a new organization automatically.

No post body was provided.

Re: Faker.js is now a community controlled project

#63

Post by encryptluks2 »

torstenvl wrote: post #57
smt88 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It doesn't feel like there was enough criticism against GitHub for their decision to ban the developer of faker/colors. HN, at least, had a ton of discussion on this[1]. People advocated both ways. > This was his own corner of the internet for him to publish his own personal projects. No, it wasn't. It was Github's corner of the internet and then it was Microsoft's. If he just wanted a place to publish his personal…

Quoted post unavailable.

No post body was provided.

Re: Faker.js is now a community controlled project

#64

Post by jeroenhd »

CrimsonCape wrote: post #46

I'm not understanding this situation from the perspective of intellectual property. This new project probably doesn't have the copyright of the author??

I doubt the original author had a trademark on the name "Faker" [0] and the MIT license the project was published under allows anyone to re-upload the source code to the internet and subsequently modify it.

The copyright to the original code still belongs to the original author, of course, but the author has chosen to license his code in such a way that this is a perfectly fine thing to do. This is the power (and, for some, the weakness) of open source.

[0]: I can only find one live registration by the name "Faker" here, and it's not in the same segment as computer software https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=toc&state=4801%3A...

Re: Faker.js is now a community controlled project

#66

Post by [deleted] »

encryptluks2 wrote: post #60
shadowgovt wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, GitHub's actions here have in no way damaged my trust in them. They interpreted a developer's attempt to harm the community via abuse of the trust the community had placed in him as damage and mitigated it in the short run. That's a value-add.

Value add in to who? It sounds like you believe open source developers owe something to someone which simply isn't the case. You should evaluate the license(s): THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIA…

[deleted]

Re: Faker.js is now a community controlled project

#67

Post by BoysenberryPi »

Aerroon wrote: post #59
goodoldneon wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freedom of speech doesn’t mean you can do whatever you want on someone else’s server. The project was hosted on GitHub, so GitHub can take significant action to protect the community. He can host his project elsewhere if he doesn’t agree with GitHub’s actions

What about somebody else's internet connection? If we apply the same logic to ISPs then the future of the internet would look quite bleak.

Whether you agree or disagree with it, ISPs have the right to fire you as a customer. However, I don't usually see that exercising that right unless it's for piracy.

Re: Faker.js is now a community controlled project

#68

Post by exdsq »

Why is this project so popular? I’ve built mini APIs to do this in several previous jobs - either for the purpose of fuzzing, anonymizing real user data for test environments, or readable testing. Each time it’s taken maybe two days of effort in total starting simple and growing for internal needs. How has this been funded so much, for something that’s as simple as dictionary.getRandom()? And why does it need eight contributors, social media accounts, etc?

Re: Faker.js is now a community controlled project

#69

Post by labster »

viraptor wrote: post #40
manquer wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was malicious act to Github's users. Github first responsibility comes to the community of users it supports, then to any individual user. Free speech/ personal choice / Freedom of expression come secondary to the welfare of its users. Is it a slippery slope ? Yes, but Github does not have a choice if it cared about the interest its community

> It was malicious act to Github's users. I'm not sure why it matters they are Github users. The packages were hosted on npm through Cloudflare - does that allow Cloudflare to take over the packages too? And NS1 since they host the fakerjs domain?

It’s cool that you’re internet rules-lawyering and all but ultimately he used his free account with intent to harm others, just as surely as if he backdoored his code. Freedom of speech is good, and protest is fine, but why would GitHub amplify the speech of a nutso who abused his position of trust?

Re: Faker.js is now a community controlled project

#70

Post by fault1 »

ricardobeat wrote: post #58
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but you are relying on people (who were never aware of the switch and the new fork) being okay with this, without their consent. Open Collective makes it clear that the sponsorship is for the project, not for a specific person. It's not "without their consent". It's literally the terms of the Open Collective.

Does it matter what Open Collective thinks if most people believe this is immoral?

Define "most" people....

To me, this is like the left-pad incident and npm. There was a vocal minority who denounced npm for looking after the greater good, maintaining continuity and transferring the project to someone else.

In this case, since the author also deleted the project, the proper way to maintain continuity for the sponsors seems to transfer it to the new community of folks who are interested in maintaining the project. Sponsoring the old deleted project does nobody any good.

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with what OC did.

Post reply on HN