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

Saying Goodbye to GitHub

ersei.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 450 posts

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#261

Post by ilyt »

tm-guimaraes wrote: post #194
uuuguaii wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not aware of any Open Source license,or Free license for that matter,that has a give-back clause. Source code is available to -users- ,not prior-authors. In essence, copyleft licenses are exactly that. They oblige the author of a derived work to publish the changes to all users under the same terms. The original authors tend to be users. So, a license which would grant this directly to the original authors woul…

> That's the spirit here not really. All this Free Software movement started by something really similar to "right to repair", a firmware bug in a printer that was proprietary software. Free Software is about being in control of software you use. The spirit was never "contribute back to GNU", the spirit was always "if you take GNU software, you can't make it non-free". Those GNU devs at the time just wanted a good an…

> All this Free Software movement started by something really similar to "right to repair", a firmware bug in a printer that was proprietary software. Free Software is about being in control of software you use. The spirit was never "contribute back to GNU", the spirit was always "if you take GNU software, you can't make it non-free". Those GNU devs at the time just wanted a good and actually free/libre OS, that would remain free no matter who distributed it.

Distinction without a difference. The end result is the same.

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#262

Post by lelanthran »

fariszr wrote: post #33

> The code that was regurgitated by the model is marketed as "AI generated" and available for use for any project you want. Including proprietary ones. It's laundering open-source code. All of the decades of knowledge and uncountable hours of work is being, well, stolen. There is nothing being given back. Leaving GitHub wont change that, OpenAI is training its models on every bit of code they can have, sourcehut, cod…

> Leaving GitHub wont change that, OpenAI is training its models on every bit of code they can have, sourcehut, codeberg etc. If its public, they will train on it.

Not every bit of code, they are respecting proprietary licenses.

When MS puts the code for Windows, Office, Azure and everything else in front of ChatGPT, Copilot, whatever other AI learning model they have, then perhaps they have a leg to stand on.

Otherwise, they're just being hypocritical to claim that no injury is being done by using code for training, because they are refusing to train on any of their code.

Right now it just looks like they are ripping off open source licenses without meeting the terms of the license.

https://www.lelanthran.com/chap7/content.html

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#263

Post by eviks »

Narann wrote: post #134
eviks wrote: post #95

Why don't the alternative projects just copy the good old github interface instead of starting from a bad scratch, scaring the transitioning devs off?

I'm sure there are others, but Codeberg is exactly this: https://codeberg.org/

Yes, that's a good example (and the author also mentioned this), but then there is sr.ht

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#264

Post by lelanthran »

lofaszvanitt wrote: post #168
fariszr wrote: post #33

> The code that was regurgitated by the model is marketed as "AI generated" and available for use for any project you want. Including proprietary ones. It's laundering open-source code. All of the decades of knowledge and uncountable hours of work is being, well, stolen. There is nothing being given back. Leaving GitHub wont change that, OpenAI is training its models on every bit of code they can have, sourcehut, cod…

This whole open source thing is the biggest farce on planet Earth. Someone with a good knowledge about geeks and their behaviour concocted up this open source bullshit. So now talented people give their skill to the "whole" and they have to beg for contributions and donations to get by. And other geeks (not suits with ties) finance the ones they sympathise with. It's ridiculous. And faceless entities use their hard w…

> So now talented people give their skill to the "whole" and they have to beg for contributions and donations to get by. And other geeks (not suits with ties) finance the ones they sympathise with. It's ridiculous.

Is it? I can't think of a single professional dev making money right now that isn't making money because they did not have to reinvent the entire tech stack that they are skilled in.

If there was no open source, we'd all be making a lot less, and the state of tech would be far far smaller than it is right now.

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#265

Post by Guid_NewGuid »

My thoughts on the co-pilot thing remain as vague as ever but I made something of a connection reading this:

> GPL violations by soulless corporations stealing the hard work of independent programmers and assimilating it into their own proprietary software

"stealing"? Where's it gone? It vanished!? It's been erased from the internet?

Why do we play these semantic artificial scarcity games with code that has deliberately been made publicly accessible? If I read your code and copy it to a file on my computer it hasn't been destroyed, it hasn't gone anywhere. If my computer reads the code it hasn't vanished into the ether.

I don't pirate films/games/TV/books but I think open source code is an entirely different beast to the former.

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#266

Post by eviks »

sneak wrote: post #241

Why do people believe that giving a gift (releasing free software) obligates the recipients of those gifts? This idea that open source code can be "stolen" is insane. You can't steal a gift. Once you give it away, it is no longer yours.

Maybe for the same reason people believe in reciprocity with actual gifts and in other areas of human interaction?

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#267

Post by eviks »

layer8 wrote: post #142
eviks wrote: post #95

Why don't the alternative projects just copy the good old github interface instead of starting from a bad scratch, scaring the transitioning devs off?

Copyright could be an issue. Also, they may not agree that the GitHub interface is “good”.

I'm not sure © blocks, see Codeberg that is pretty close. Have you seen an example of an interface that is better?

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#268

Post by TheDong »

lofaszvanitt wrote: post #225
elric wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yikes. You sound very bitter. Is there a story behind that bitterness? There's a wide variety of people in the open source community at large. And a wide variety of motivations for contributing. I for one am happy that open source software is a thing. It's been a net good for mankind. Sure, there are abuses, and I'm sure many things could be improved. But I'm glad it's there all the same.

Nah, not at all, just don't like power structures that feed on benevolent naivety. Of course it's good, but compensating those people should be the norm. Where is the payments side of github for example? So it's open source but in order to clone the rep you should spend 1 bucks on it, or if you want a bug/feature addressed you could name a price or the dev can set the price on it? Because the holy sacred cow must not…

> compensating those people should be the norm. Where is the payments side of github for example? [..] if you want a bug/feature addressed you could name a price or the dev can set the price on it?

Github does have monetization. It has "sponsors", and you can create a "sponsor" level that is basically "I will consult with you and prioritize bugs you choose".

It's totally normal for a developer who wants to monetize a popular open source project to offer consulting or "pay for me to work on your bug". That's already there.

... However, I would like to provide an alternative view. I am personally very happy that monetary compensation is not the norm in free software. I find joy in coding, but I find far more joy in coding when there's no money involved. When I am able to work as much or as little as I want, without feeling any form of financial obligation to others (which inescapably comes from being paid), I am happier.

If the norm was to pay or be paid in free software, I would not find joy in it. I would likely not participate.

By analogy, let's say that me and some friends get together to eat food, and each bring a meal. You might say "oh, that is a waste, the person who made a meatloaf could have sold that for money. Everyone at this meal should be paying each other for their cooking, and the person who cooked the most ends up making some money". Do you not see how that would ruin the feeling of cooking for your friends and enjoying time together?

To me, the free software community has a similar thing. Because the norm is assuming people are just trying to build stuff, not make money, it makes it a far more pleasant activity.

> And people rationalizing the all devouring machine, hell, it is just bonkers.

To me, the truly bonkers thing is people letting capitalism eat them. "You have to have your grindset, optimize your time to make money", it seems bonkers to me. People trying to rationalize their existence not by finding communities and trying to help others, but by trying to make their wealth as large as possible, often at the expense of happiness.

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#269

Post by mikewarot »

I think the "laundering" charge works both ways. While it is true that it will help some leverage work that went into GPL projects for new non-GPL projects, it is more important to know that it provides cover from accidentally importing copyrighted material from Microsoft, et al, into GPL projects.

While the value of the trade might not be fair, the cost that legions of corporate "Intellectual Property" lawyers can force upon the lone open source developer are a far larger drag on development.

Re: Saying Goodbye to GitHub

#270

Post by sylware »

themusicgod1 wrote: post #256
sylware wrote: post #245

I kept my github account to report issues on the projects still on github. Even though github is own by the untrustable msft, it (still) does work with noscript/basic (x)html browsers (well I created my account probably a decade ago). gitlab: I cannot even create an account.

Stop reporting issues to github.

Tell valve to move to another noscript/basic (x)html friendly source code and issue reporting site then.

Yep, I have a sin: I play native elf/linux games.

Post reply on HN