121–130 of 332 posts
> ... is now part of ... Can someone please explain what that means? Is the code not accessible anymore? Is it frozen? No commits allowed? What exactly are the implications here?
I think the long term solution for this problem is the developers of open source software like the bit torrent client, youtube-dl and other similar software will have to host their code outside of the reach of DMCA regualation. That will usually mean something like Github like site hosted in Russia, China or some other bloc where DMCA does not apply. Right now, lots of users in the US scientific community use Scihub…
Hosting the git repository on ipfs might be a solution.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And as much as RIAA is mostly a slimey pit of lawyers, they would stand no chance again msft's goblin hoard of attorneys.
More attorneys does not convince judges more. The RIAA has some merit, therefore they can preliminary injunction github to remove the repo. If github doesn't comply then they receive sanctions. That's simply how it works.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And as much as RIAA is mostly a slimey pit of lawyers, they would stand no chance again msft's goblin hoard of attorneys.
More attorneys does not convince judges more. The RIAA has some merit, therefore they can preliminary injunction github to remove the repo. If github doesn't comply then they receive sanctions. That's simply how it works.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Relying on other countries can't ever be a long term solution. That pirate bay and scihub are still around, that their authors are walking around freely, is a miracle that should not be taken for granted. We need to work on fixing these problems in our own countries. We need to talk about the freedoms we care about, put a good brand to those freedoms and win popular attention and enshrine those freedoms into law. And…
> That pirate bay and scihub are still around, that their authors are walking around freely Let's not equate these sites. scihub gives people what they are likely already paid for. Academic publishing business is a fraud. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PriwCi6SzLo (recent video on the topic that I liked)
I think the long term solution for this problem is the developers of open source software like the bit torrent client, youtube-dl and other similar software will have to host their code outside of the reach of DMCA regualation. That will usually mean something like Github like site hosted in Russia, China or some other bloc where DMCA does not apply. Right now, lots of users in the US scientific community use Scihub…
Relying on other countries can't ever be a long term solution. That pirate bay and scihub are still around, that their authors are walking around freely, is a miracle that should not be taken for granted. We need to work on fixing these problems in our own countries. We need to talk about the freedoms we care about, put a good brand to those freedoms and win popular attention and enshrine those freedoms into law. And…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> RIAA should get a strong kick for this. Regardless of this particular case, the world would've been a saner place if copyright holders were held liable for erroneous claims.
Is it legal to file a DMCA claim when the motivation is retaliation? (Assuming that the person filing retaliatory DMCA claim can satisfy the good-faith requirement, that is.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
RIAA taking down all of GitHub would instantly pit them against all of Microsoft, and make every developer who already hates their guts to pick up the pitchforks and march. They won't try doing it.
> RIAA taking down all of GitHub would instantly pit them against all of Microsoft microsoft isn't gonna fight the good fight. There's no reward (to them) for doing so, and there's only a cost. It'd be a stupid business decision. What is more correct is to lobby legislation changes to copyright. Repeal the DMCA, or change copyright law to such that you cannot abuse it this way. And this lobbying is the civil responsi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Relying on other countries can't ever be a long term solution. That pirate bay and scihub are still around, that their authors are walking around freely, is a miracle that should not be taken for granted. We need to work on fixing these problems in our own countries. We need to talk about the freedoms we care about, put a good brand to those freedoms and win popular attention and enshrine those freedoms into law. And…
> That pirate bay and scihub are still around, that their authors are walking around freely Let's not equate these sites. scihub gives people what they are likely already paid for. Academic publishing business is a fraud. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PriwCi6SzLo (recent video on the topic that I liked)
No, as long as the researcher was not bound by the grant to publish in the open and published in a journal/conference with a copyright, you do not have the legal right to get it, even if taxpayers funded the research.
It’s fucked that the law doesn’t stipulate open publications for taxpayer funded research, but that’s an issue with the law. Academic publishing isn’t a “fraud” in the normal definition.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's due to how git works. In order for git tools to compare and otherwise work with two commits, both commits need to be in the same repo. If "forking" a repo on github really cloned it in their infrastructure, they'd require far more data. So all forks of a github repo point to the same repo, only with different branches. Note that git clone only clones the actually present branches of the upstream you point it to,…
This isn’t simply because of how Git works. You can configure Git to look in multiple places for repo objects. For whatever reason, the GitHub devs either didn’t know this, or they didn’t want to implement their forking and pull request systems this way. As someone else mentioned, this may be an intentional design to make it simpler to implement pulling down remote PRs from the destination repo.
What do you mean by multiple places for repo objects? Do you mean multiple remotes? The remotes are fully inside your local database if you run commands like git pull or git remote update, they are just not in your checkout. Commands like git show work on commit hashes in those remotes as well, even if it's not in one of your local branches.
Or do you mean configuring git to use multiple .git/objects directories? I haven't heard of that feature, can you give a link?