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

I didn't get paid, so I open-sourced my client’s project

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 272 posts

Re: I didn't get paid, so I open-sourced my client’s project

#241

Post by daveFNbuck »

olliej wrote: post #56
trillcyborg wrote: post #37

Hey guys its cool to see that you like my project. Unfortunately these types of things happen to independent contractors often and theres not a whole lot you can do about it but learn from mistakes. I used some awesome tech for the first time in this one like react-native-web which is now in Expo and react-spring for those sexy animations. Im happy for any of you guys to use this project as a boilerplate, learn some…

Have you ever seen mike monteiro’s “fuck you pay me” talk? Assuming that your contract leaves you with copyright until you’re paid you could always have dmca’d them when they deployed. But that’s the vindictive side of me :D

The client pivoted, so there won't be a deployment.

Re: I didn't get paid, so I open-sourced my client’s project

#242

Post by mr_toad »

vzaliva wrote: post #2

INAL but even if you did not get paid does not automatically means the result of work for hire belongs to you. If you are a contractor this is a smart thing to explicitly stipulate in the contract.

True, but they’d have a difficult time suing you for breach of contract given that they’d already broken the contract themselves.

Re: I didn't get paid, so I open-sourced my client’s project

#243

Post by oefrha »

jwr wrote: post #230
qafy wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting... I use Spark but when I authorized my gmail account I went through a Google Oauth flow, never entered my password into Spark itself.

If you used any IMAP accounts (not from Google), you would need to enter the password. And Spark will quietly send it to "the cloud" and keep it there, with servers accessing your mail whenever they please. This is kind-of mentioned in the Privacy Policy, but in a way that wasn't clear to me at all. I found this unacceptable, so I can't use Spark, which I regret. I also lost trust for Readdle, so now, even though the…

Storing the IMAP password is basically the same as storing the Gmail OAuth token in terms of access control, not sure why you think storing one is more evil or scarier than the other.

AFAIK Spark’s push notification service relies on checking for mail server-side (so that they don’t drain your battery with constant background refreshes, I suppose?), so I wouldn’t consider it sneaky.

Re: I didn't get paid, so I open-sourced my client’s project

#244

Post by tuananh »

daveFNbuck wrote: post #241
olliej wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever seen mike monteiro’s “fuck you pay me” talk? Assuming that your contract leaves you with copyright until you’re paid you could always have dmca’d them when they deployed. But that’s the vindictive side of me :D

The client pivoted, so there won't be a deployment.

that's what he said :D

Re: I didn't get paid, so I open-sourced my client’s project

#246

Post by ncallaway »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #225
ncallaway wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If he's not paid, what validity does the contract have? What does this mean? The contract is valid absent payment. A contract has to have consideration for both parties to be a valid contract, but a promise of payment is a perfectly valid consideration and would make the contract valid.

How can a promise of payment, combined with a refusal to honor that promise, be valid consideration? It doesn't differ from a promise of nothing.

Your interpretation would fundamentally defeat the purpose of almost all contract law.

The promise of payment itself is consideration. The refusal to honor that promise is the breach of the contract. The contract itself doesn't become invalid because one party breaches the contract. Again, such an interpretation would fully the entire purpose of contract law.

Re: I didn't get paid, so I open-sourced my client’s project

#247

Post by sixtypoundhound »

xwdv wrote: post #81

Don’t understand why someone would throw away their integrity by doing this. When a client refuses to pay, the standard procedure is to take them to court and then make them pay what is owed + attorney fees. Instead, this developer has put himself on industry blacklists by doing this. No way he’ll be trusted with sensitive projects. Don’t do this.

Wait - pause - you're going to put me on a blacklist for working without being paid, despite the terms of the agreement?

Yeah, go for it.

From what I can tell, it can only reduce the number of pompous jerks attempting to milk me for free work...

Re: I didn't get paid, so I open-sourced my client’s project

#248

Post by BrandoElFollito »

jwr wrote: post #179
qafy wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you aren't comfortable with that you better not use any fintech apps like Cash App, Venmo, Wealthfront, Robinhood, any Intuit products, etc. These services use Plaid (like this app does) or similar APIs like Quovo, Yodlee, etc. Even financial institutions themselves like Citi Bank, American Express, Chime, PayPal, etc use these APIs to link your accounts. And to be clear, the app itself never has access to your cr…

Well of course I won't use anything like that! I find it mind-boggling that people even consider giving a third party their bank account login+password. It's like saying "yes, I want to be robbed of all my money, please take these credentials and spread them forth to whichever leaked data pile they might end up in". My bank considers transactions done using login credentials to be final. There is no recourse if someo…

You can transfer money in your bank without a second factor check? (an SMS with a code for instance?)

An my accounts do that by default (France), except for pre-approved recipients.

Re: I didn't get paid, so I open-sourced my client’s project

#249

Post by fireant »

maaaats wrote: post #106
burlesona wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but this is increasingly common in online services. Reputable services like Wealthfront also work like this, requiring your bank login to work. The fact that Plaid has their entire business built around providing “bank logins as a service” speaks to that. I don’t like it either, but I’m not sure how you could get archaic banks and low-tech consumers to adopt something better.

In Europe they solve it with laws. PSD2 forces banks to become open, and allow others to make services on top.

I work on PSD2 implementation for a local bank. Will solve is correct, not many banks implement it yet (but "final" deadline is approaching). Also there are rate limits for PSD2 APIs. And also the extremely costly license, which means that there will have to be middlemen reselling PSD2 access.

Re: I didn't get paid, so I open-sourced my client’s project

#250

Post by kristianc »

chatmasta wrote: post #202
kristianc wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well, the fact that banks traditionally allow reverting fraudulent transactions is becoming more and more of a unique selling point. Playing fast and loose with security because the bank will be on the hook (at financial cost to the bank) does not seem like a moral or ethical thing to do, and banks would be likely to pull transaction reversion from anyone who tried to use it as a feature.

On the contrary, the fact that services like Plaid are able to exist, indicates otherwise. If banks had a problem with the implementation, they would send cease and desists.

In the UK at least, there's often a liability shift if you do end up using a service such as Plaid.

Banks won't cover you for fraud that ends up happening because of you handing your online banking password to someone and rightly so.

When they do cover you, it'll be because they have a professional relationship with Plaid and/or they rely on other auth methods such as EMV CAP.

Post reply on HN