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

Automatic1111's GitHub account suspended for "ToS violations" [restored]

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 500 posts

Re: Automatic1111's GitHub account suspended for "ToS violations" [restored]

#231

Post by operator-name »

amelius wrote: post #98
kleiba wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, someone should invent a version control system that does not rely on some central entity but is actually distributed.

How do we know how to trust it without a central entity looking over its quality OR the next best thing such as provide usage statistics and community tools like an issue tracker etc.

Linux's model of trusting people seems to work for them. Github doesn't guarentee quality - the primary developer(s) were always the artiber of quality. There are also various projects managing issue tracking inside or alongside git, or git alternatives that integrate an issue tracker.

Re: Automatic1111's GitHub account suspended for "ToS violations" [restored]

#232

Post by tacker2000 »

nodja wrote: post #204

Regardless of what the author of the repo did or did not do, I think that deleting his account and everything in it is a failure on the part of github and warrants a policy change. There's lots of good knowledge contained in the issues and discussions hosted on the webui repo all of which are now lost or very hard to find. Even papers coming from big companies have directly used the repo as reference[1]. I was person…

Fully agree.

I didnt read the full thing but the point is, is any code worth less because it’s author is making some statements that in the eyes of some people would not be not acceptable? Who decides that?

I think this is the point where github ceases to be of use as a platform to host code, since at any point they could come down on you, and in succession break hundreds of other programs that would have dependencies on the “banned” code, etc…

Re: Automatic1111's GitHub account suspended for "ToS violations" [restored]

#233

Post by reportgunner »

weberer wrote: post #208
ilyt wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or if one of thousands contributors happened to be? We already had developer (of Drupal[1]) cancelled over their private BDSM kink (that isn't even illegal, which racism is), what stops some random moderator for deciding he's the saviour of the world and banning random repos just because a contributor might've been questionable? * [1] https://www.theregister.com/2017/03/29/drupal_dev_banished/

What country is racism illegal?

I think in some european countries it is, but don't quote me on that.

Re: Automatic1111's GitHub account suspended for "ToS violations" [restored]

#237

Post by pelasaco »

nightpool wrote: post #162
pelasaco wrote: post #123

Maybe I'm being naive, but reading this comment in his steam page, looks like he is well intentioned https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=15187... "Edit 26-mar-2020: finally, the injustice has been corrected: all races are welcome! You can choose the range of skin colors you want in mod settings."

I'm not sure I see how that was well intentioned? The developer releases a mod that removes non-white people from the game, and then two years later releases two other mods that "equalize" the situation by removing all races except one. I struggle to see what evidence of good intentions you're seeing in that quote.

I understand that a racist would never write something like: "finally, the injustice has been corrected"

Re: Automatic1111's GitHub account suspended for "ToS violations" [restored]

#238

Post by dist1ll »

bayindirh wrote: post #51
dig1 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At some point, someone will (re)discover the Linux Kernel development model again and announce that chatting over a mailing list, reporting bugs over (self-hosted) Bugzilla and sending patches via mail is the best thing since sliced bread ;)

That's called source hut ( https://sourcehut.org ), which I use with great delight.

SourceHut as a solution to centralized censorship is...questionable.

SourceHut bans anything blockchain/crypto related from their platform.

Re: Automatic1111's GitHub account suspended for "ToS violations" [restored]

#239

Post by gitfan86 »

ceejayoz wrote: post #163
gitfan86 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which ironically is how white people during the Jim Crow era in the south decided guilt vs innocence of black people accused of crimes. No real evidence just assumptions of circumstances based off of the person's skin color.

Circumstantial evidence is real evidence. People get convicted over it regularly. People in the Jim Crow era were convicted without evidence, or had exonerating evidence hidden by racist law enforcement and prosecutors. It’s hardly the same.

Seems like you have decided that based off of someone's race that all circumstantial evidence should be assumed to prove guilt

Re: Automatic1111's GitHub account suspended for "ToS violations" [restored]

#240

Post by lbeltrame »

tacker2000 wrote: post #232
nodja wrote: post #204

Regardless of what the author of the repo did or did not do, I think that deleting his account and everything in it is a failure on the part of github and warrants a policy change. There's lots of good knowledge contained in the issues and discussions hosted on the webui repo all of which are now lost or very hard to find. Even papers coming from big companies have directly used the repo as reference[1]. I was person…

Fully agree. I didnt read the full thing but the point is, is any code worth less because it’s author is making some statements that in the eyes of some people would not be not acceptable? Who decides that? I think this is the point where github ceases to be of use as a platform to host code, since at any point they could come down on you, and in succession break hundreds of other programs that would have dependencie…

Personally it would've been better to take down the offending repos and at least give a warning to the author before doing this.

Now all knowledge is lost. Not the code, but there were discussions, tutorials, and what not.

I don't know who Auto is or what he did in practice that led to the violation (yes, I read about those mods): my qualms with the repo were due to its questionable licensing, which is, however, allowed by GH. After all, I can use something without agreeing with the author's moral views.

And yes, this again, even if one agrees with the suspension, shows the danger of centralized platforms when they become so large (although they are convenient).

Post reply on HN