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

German parliament votes as a Git contribution graph

abstimmung.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 179 posts

Re: German parliament votes as a Git contribution graph

#61

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

dullcrisp wrote: post #48
__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I were putting government procedure on a blockchain, I'd want something stronger than SHA1 for the edges.

What? Why?

Because it's outdated and not fit for use in adversarial contexts: https://security.googleblog.com/2017/02/announcing-first-sha...

Most git repos are not adversarial, so they get away with using it. A malicious commit which put a loop or a fork in your commit history would just be rejected--if not by the software, then by the maintainer.

But if you're tracking the state of some legal procedure in congress or whatever, you really don't want anybody playing games with history, since presumably it would determine important societal outcomes like whether a bill became law.

Re: German parliament votes as a Git contribution graph

#62

Post by nyanpasu64 »

trashchomper wrote: post #51
yallpendantools wrote: post #46

Sorry it might be my turn on the Dunce hat but what is so "Git" here other than the contribution calendar popularized by Github then copied by Gitlab?

I feel like you answered your own question... Like I get it, but English is fluid and is it really that far to make the assumptive leap from "git" to "github/lab/service", seems pretty clear what they meant (even if it's not completely/technically/um-actually correct because git != github).

When I read contribution graph I assumed it would be a revision history graph of commits and authors.

Re: German parliament votes as a Git contribution graph

#63

Post by Terr_ »

KennyBlanken wrote: post #28
Terr_ wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Washington DC's laws are in git. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/11/how-i-changed-th...

Github, not "git." They don't appear to publish the XML formats they're using. There's no description of their fees/pricing. None of the software is open-source. There's barely any details about how the software even works. It's about as opaque as they seem to feel they can get away with. "Email us for pricing" is not how a service like that should work.

> Github, not "git."

No, I stand by my original phrasing: The important part here is that legislative changes are being recorded and shown through a version control system (i.e. git) not the fact that one of the repos is publicly visible via one of several possible web-GUI services.

It would still be somewhat laudable even if the usage was: "Here's the repo, clone it yourself an poke around with desktop tools." In contrast, the opposite mix of "here's a website that shows diffs but you can't have the underlying data" would suck.

> They don't appear to publish the XML formats they're using.

I see XSD files...? Plus, this original design doc is probably still relevant. [0]

[0] https://github.com/DCCouncil/dc-code-prototype?tab=readme-ov...

Re: German parliament votes as a Git contribution graph

#65

Post by dullcrisp »

__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #61
dullcrisp wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? Why?

Because it's outdated and not fit for use in adversarial contexts: https://security.googleblog.com/2017/02/announcing-first-sha... Most git repos are not adversarial, so they get away with using it. A malicious commit which put a loop or a fork in your commit history would just be rejected--if not by the software, then by the maintainer. But if you're tracking the state of some legal procedure in congress or whatever…

I thought the explanation was that SHA1 collision attacks on git repositories weren’t feasible, not that we don’t care about people sneaking things into our git repositories.

Re: German parliament votes as a Git contribution graph

#66

Post by veqq »

fashion-at-cost wrote: post #40
LorenDB wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See also the US Constitution in GitHub: https://github.com/JesseKPhillips/USA-Constitution

Nice. I kinda wish they went all the way and modified the commit details to have the actual authoring dates for each amendment/etc. Anyone know how well git plays with pre-epoch timestamps?

> how well git plays with pre-epoch timestamps?

Tangentially, most RSS readers don't play nicely. A lot of webtooling doesn't like featuring e.g. old poetry etc. with the actual dates e.g.: https://alexalejandre.com/poetry/ I got a few e.g. newsboat to update their handling though.

Re: German parliament votes as a Git contribution graph

#67

Post by [deleted] »

dullcrisp wrote: post #65
__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's outdated and not fit for use in adversarial contexts: https://security.googleblog.com/2017/02/announcing-first-sha... Most git repos are not adversarial, so they get away with using it. A malicious commit which put a loop or a fork in your commit history would just be rejected--if not by the software, then by the maintainer. But if you're tracking the state of some legal procedure in congress or whatever…

I thought the explanation was that SHA1 collision attacks on git repositories weren’t feasible, not that we don’t care about people sneaking things into our git repositories.

[deleted]

Re: German parliament votes as a Git contribution graph

#70

Post by mseepgood »

trashchomper wrote: post #51
yallpendantools wrote: post #46

Sorry it might be my turn on the Dunce hat but what is so "Git" here other than the contribution calendar popularized by Github then copied by Gitlab?

I feel like you answered your own question... Like I get it, but English is fluid and is it really that far to make the assumptive leap from "git" to "github/lab/service", seems pretty clear what they meant (even if it's not completely/technically/um-actually correct because git != github).

When I think of a graph I think of nodes and edges.
Post reply on HN