So weird, I don't understand the freakout. Microsoft is a solid company, I am totally fine with them buying it. What is with all this craziness?
Microsoft was not always this cozy with open source and with regards to their acquisition policy.
I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
151–160 of 210 posts
Re: I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
#152Re: I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
#153I asked: What are your thoughts on how GitHub can incentivize open source work financially? Perhaps by integrating something like Patreon or OpenCollective in the website. It seems that he won't answer it. Still would be awesome if GitHub started addressing this in some way in the future. EDIT: He answered it. https://www.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/8pc8mf/im_nat_friedman...
He didn't really answer it, though. We, too, would "find it amazing to see what could happen". But that doesn't tell us anything whatsoever.
He's a CEO-to-be, not the tyrant who can make all the decisions and know all the answers months before he even starts the job without consulting anyone involved.
Re: I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought we are supposed to be sharing our opinions on HN with respect. Since when is stating my opinion on an opinion-based community none of my business? I am saying these questions should not be asked. Please provide a counter argument.
My counter argument is that these questions can be asked, it's none of your business to sayt what questions should not be asked on a reddit community. Historically, r/(I)AMA has been just that, and the ducks question is part of the community's history now (I can't think of a semi-famous AMA in the last year where that question wasn't asked). More importantly, it's an ama, and the fact that he is about to be github CE…
I accept your apology.
I still do not agree with "it's none of your business to sayt what questions should not be asked on a reddit community". With that line of thought, none of this is our business to be on the internet and providing opinions. Instead of focusing on what's someone's business and what's not - I recommend you state why asking, what I believe to be useless questions, would be beneficial. What insight does it provide? I understand it could be fun and quirky but literally, every thread on reddit...I mean every...single...thread... on reddit starts with a joke.
Re: I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
#155> That said, the GitHub team reports that the set of users who have migrated or closed their accounts is extremely small, and this is more than made up for by the surge of new signups and new interest in GitHub this week. It's interesting to hear this. If you were on HN the past week, it might have seemed from all the front page articles that GitHub was about to implode due to an an exodus to GitLab.
I think most people mirrored instead of closing. Spin.
When I moved to gitlab a couple of years ago, I created a commit in each repo which deleted all files and replaced with a single README file pointing to the new URL, pushed those up to github, and then locally undid the commit.
I guess they count as mirrored.
Re: I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this falls under “I want a president I would have a beer with”, you’re judging something by a bad metric.
Only if it's the only metric. I've worked with people who would never be comfortable making jokes like that in a public forum, always having their "PR-mode" on, and they tend to be the ones that don't have a ton of empathy. Being able to interact with the community in a human way is definitely a good signal, imo.
Eh... for a small organization sure but I think relatability from big wigs is more used as a way to hand wave controversies than being used for actual good?
I think the president analogy really holds. A president who you could have a beer with can get away with a lot more crap then one who has to prove it through policy.
I’m definitely being a bit nit picky, just saying it’s not a good metric.
Re: I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
#157So weird, I don't understand the freakout. Microsoft is a solid company, I am totally fine with them buying it. What is with all this craziness?
Microsoft has a long history of not only opposing open source, but actively trying to attack and discredit it. That and they are somewhat notorious for their whole "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" approach.
Re: I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
Using HackerNews reaction as a main source of information will almost always drastically skew reality. It reminds me of people shorting Facebook because of the #deletefacebook campaign, when in reality getting a few thousand people to delete Facebook in protest is offset in a few minutes by growth.
I can tell you that my Facebook feed is dead. Very few post anymore. I don't really post anymore either. I just have it for events.
March 27th hight of delete facebook "movement" FB stock reaches low of $152.22. Since then, it has rocked up to new highs. Moral of the story as this keeps on happening over and over again (United Airlines, Tesla, Apple, Wells Fargo), do the opposite of media/HN outrage and buy emotional outrage dips... Profit.
Re: I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
#159So weird, I don't understand the freakout. Microsoft is a solid company, I am totally fine with them buying it. What is with all this craziness?
Microsoft is where good products go to die. They change products and the communities and cultures associated with those projects. They are a big machine that has to please shareholders, and growth is difficult when you’re that big, so there are “hard choices” that can be made abruptly. These choices are often not to the benefit of the existing communities.
Ignore anyone who brings up “Embrace, extend, extinguish”. I’m not an MS apologist but no rational person can still consider that to be relevant. There are many reasons to distrust them, but that isn’t one of them.
Re: I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do they? Are they backed by capital pushing for an “Exit”, and even if so, couldn’t an IPO be a viable option?
They’ve taken a big pile of VC funding, so the answer to your first question is yes. Meanwhile, the biggest player (by far) in the market just abandoned dreams of an IPO. Gitlab is a distant third place in that market, and has a revenue model that is best described as “like Github, but cheaper.” IPOs are only viable if you have a business capable of supporting them.
> ... that is best described as “like Github, but cheaper.”
Aha, I thought I may find you on this thread, once again pushing the same line.