Live data from Hacker News

Discourse Is Not Going Closed Source

blog.discourse.org

31–40 of 90 posts

Re: Discourse Is Not Going Closed Source

#31
post #12

> Open source creates a useful urgency: when your code is public, you assume it will be examined closely, so you invest earlier and more aggressively in finding and fixing issues before attackers do. This should be the mentality of every company doing open source.Great points made.

This should be a mentality of every company building products :)

Indeed. All software products you can get your hands on are open source - compiled code is only little more difficult to read than source code, but not that much if you learn how.

Which is why ~all companies switches to offering software as a service, so this mindset doesn't apply :).

Re: Discourse Is Not Going Closed Source

#32

"over a decade ago, the repository has been licensed under GPLv2. And that’s not changing" Well - people can continue the GPLv2 fork anyway. So ultimately what Cal.com would do here does not matter; that's the beauty of GPL in general. It is a strict licence. I think GPLv2 was the better decision for the Linux kernel than, say, BSD/MIT. > That code is exposed to constant scrutiny from attackers, defenders, researcher…

We're talking about SaaS businesses anyway. Open Source doesn't really matter there - you never actually know what's running on their servers.

Re: Discourse Is Not Going Closed Source

#33

"over a decade ago, the repository has been licensed under GPLv2. And that’s not changing" Well - people can continue the GPLv2 fork anyway. So ultimately what Cal.com would do here does not matter; that's the beauty of GPL in general. It is a strict licence. I think GPLv2 was the better decision for the Linux kernel than, say, BSD/MIT. > That code is exposed to constant scrutiny from attackers, defenders, researcher…

We're talking about SaaS businesses anyway. Open Source doesn't really matter there - you never actually know what's running on their servers.

Unless this is AGPL.

Re: Discourse Is Not Going Closed Source

#34

"over a decade ago, the repository has been licensed under GPLv2. And that’s not changing" Well - people can continue the GPLv2 fork anyway. So ultimately what Cal.com would do here does not matter; that's the beauty of GPL in general. It is a strict licence. I think GPLv2 was the better decision for the Linux kernel than, say, BSD/MIT. > That code is exposed to constant scrutiny from attackers, defenders, researcher…

> the claim that open source is automatically better than closed source, when it comes to security, is also strange. Remember xz utils backdoor?

The XZ attack is an extremely rare event coming likely from a state actor, which actually proves that FLOSS is a big target not easy to attack without huge effort. It was also caught not least thanks to the open nature of the repository. Also, AFAIK it wasn't even a change in the repo itself.

In short, using FLOSS is the way to ensure security. Whenever you touch proprietary staff, be careful and use compartmentalization.

Re: Discourse Is Not Going Closed Source

#35
I've started to opensource my side projects (as long as the code is in a state that I'm not too ashamed of). Seeing how easily I can reverse engineer binaries, clone various applications, and just generally build stuff from scratch with AI assistance, I think there is no moat in hiding your source code. If you can use my code to build something better than me, I wish you the best of luck!

Re: Discourse Is Not Going Closed Source

#36
post #35

I've started to opensource my side projects (as long as the code is in a state that I'm not too ashamed of). Seeing how easily I can reverse engineer binaries, clone various applications, and just generally build stuff from scratch with AI assistance, I think there is no moat in hiding your source code. If you can use my code to build something better than me, I wish you the best of luck!

[dead]

Re: Discourse Is Not Going Closed Source

#37
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree with your definition here. Good faith means trying to be correct but potentially not being by accident. Intentionally lying is bad faith and by definition trying to trick people; you know the truth is one thing, but you're saying something else to try to get them to believe it.

What I'm saying is that even lying is only bad faith depending on the intent of the lie. That doesn't mean others can't be upset regardless of the lie's intent, but I wouldn't say all lies are bad faith.

> even lying is only bad faith depending on the intent of the lie

And the intent here is to intentionally mislead, so how is that not bad faith?

Re: Discourse Is Not Going Closed Source

#38
post #35

I've started to opensource my side projects (as long as the code is in a state that I'm not too ashamed of). Seeing how easily I can reverse engineer binaries, clone various applications, and just generally build stuff from scratch with AI assistance, I think there is no moat in hiding your source code. If you can use my code to build something better than me, I wish you the best of luck!

Instead of Microsoft snooping my code, now everyone can!

Re: Discourse Is Not Going Closed Source

#40
too bad. i wish they would go closedsource so that maybe everyone would stop using it. it's dogshit for countless reasons. including:

- refuses to even load on browser engines older than 2 years. for a webforum that's absolutely appaling. there's a barebones non-JS version. but it only loads for individual threads (not the forum homepage or anything else), so they must be linked to directly (e.g from a websearch engine)

- every single page navigation triggers the circle animation which blocks the view for up to 3 seconds. how is this not an obvious regression on webforum software that has existed for decades?

- various nonsensical functionality suggests an incoherent code base. like the input element for the searchbox disappearing if the browser window loses focus. if you switch tabs midway for whatever reason, you need to reopen the searchbox every time you get back. and you can't use an external editor to fill in the input. because as soon as you've focused the editor, the element that the editor hooked into no longer exists

- search results are crammed in a narrow responsive list with 5 entries. you need to press 'More' to see the rest of the results as yet another responsive list. you never know how many results there are in total. only that there are more than ones that loaded so far

- long threads are never rendered fully. only as incomplete chunks. so it doesn't work to set positional markers in the scroll buffer to jump back and forth. as soon as you scroll past the boundaries of the currently loaded chunk, the old content gets destroyed and replaced. it feels like having alzheimer's

- you can reply to any specific post in a thread and there will be a visual indicator about which post you replied to. except if you reply to the most recent post in a thread. so someones who reads a post has no way of knowing in advance whether it is being addressed to the post just above it, or to the thread as a whole

i hate discourse so much. i'll never understand why it got so much adoption by FOSS communities. it must be the virtue signalling

Post reply on HN