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

Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

jorijn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 380 posts

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#341

Post by lelanthran »

chasd00 wrote: post #264
lelanthran wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is a silly opinion to hold, isn't it? I mean, you release projects under a license with the express purpose of freely distributing your code among anyone in the world that may have any interest whatsoever, and even allow they themselves to share it with anyone they feel fit. But you are somehow outraged if people actually use said code? You're making things up: the outrage is not that people used it, it's that…

idk, all the code i've seen produced by an llm doesn't appear to be derived from anything. Also, the source code they were trained on does not exist in the model, it's impossible for the llm to return a code snippet from some other code base. The code snippet doesn't exist in the model in the first place. I guess another way to put it is show your code in the output of an llm that isn't being attributed correctly.

> Also, the source code they were trained on does not exist in the model, it's impossible for the llm to return a code snippet from some other code base.

So? Just because a piece of output data is encrypted or compressed and does not resemble the input, does not mean that the process did not take the input.

We have decades of law that regards zipped files as infringment, lossy compression (MP3's) as infringment, etc.

> guess another way to put it is show your code in the output of an llm that isn't being attributed correctly.

Well, a better way of putting it is answering the question "Will that model have existed had none of the code used as input existed".

IOW, can that model be generated or created without first having all that copyrighted code used as input?

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#343

Post by IanCal »

gchamonlive wrote: post #329
IanCal wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how to make it clearer. I do not understand what the "social" component of github is that people are using so heavily that it's a big thing to break from and requires huge centralisation, that it is the "most important aspect of the platform". I said that I assume I am missing something because I don't see much that really ties all these things together, and nothing like the network effects of, say, X or…

> All you've pointed to is devs working together and people filing bugs. All that requires is auth, no? Collaboration is a form of socialization. GitHub made a social network on top of a SVN to create a forge that people can interact with each other creating issues, pull requests, reviewing and commenting on them, engaging in discussions, forking and improving upon each others works... These are not "just auth" and i…

I know git doesn't do this by itself, but then we're not talking about github vs raw git - perhaps that's where you're confused by what I'm saying.

All these other services have what you're talking about, and the only cross-repo/org work I can see here is:

* Aligned accounts (person X on one service is person Y on github), if you want that continuity across services

* Forking

And the whole forking/branching/merging side is handled by raw git.

That's why I've been asking what githubs huge centralisation gets us. It has a UI and features that are useful, great, those exist in other projects too, so what is the stickiness?

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#344

Post by IanCal »

chris_money202 wrote: post #258
SpaceNoodled wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GitHub really doesn't have hundreds of additional working features beyond git.

Collaboration, issue tracking, Actions (CI/CD), Codespaces, Security, AI, Identity, social, hosting. Those are like broad categories I can think of off top of my head too you could fit probably 10-15 "features" into each of those.

Lots of those aren't centralisation/decentralisation issues though - codespaces, actions, issue tracking, multiple users, all that is repo/org level.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#345

Post by gchamonlive »

IanCal wrote: post #343
gchamonlive wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All you've pointed to is devs working together and people filing bugs. All that requires is auth, no? Collaboration is a form of socialization. GitHub made a social network on top of a SVN to create a forge that people can interact with each other creating issues, pull requests, reviewing and commenting on them, engaging in discussions, forking and improving upon each others works... These are not "just auth" and i…

I know git doesn't do this by itself, but then we're not talking about github vs raw git - perhaps that's where you're confused by what I'm saying. All these other services have what you're talking about, and the only cross-repo/org work I can see here is: * Aligned accounts (person X on one service is person Y on github), if you want that continuity across services * Forking And the whole forking/branching/merging s…

Either you understand or you don't understand the value of UAC in social networks, I can't explain it anymore than I had. Sorry.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#346

Post by epicide »

nottorp wrote: post #316
jorams wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You didn't mention private repos in your comment, but I guess that was implied in the $7 thing. That said: SourceHut has private repos and access control.

> SourceHut has private repos and access control ... but not on the sr.ht link you gave. That's a list of projects like your average open source hosting landing page. You have to click on the tiny sourcehut link at the top to see the real site.

Right, I always forget that the sr.ht link is to the application itself.

For anybody else who needs it, the page with info about the service is here: https://sourcehut.org/

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#347

Post by chris_money202 »

IanCal wrote: post #344
chris_money202 wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Collaboration, issue tracking, Actions (CI/CD), Codespaces, Security, AI, Identity, social, hosting. Those are like broad categories I can think of off top of my head too you could fit probably 10-15 "features" into each of those.

Lots of those aren't centralisation/decentralisation issues though - codespaces, actions, issue tracking, multiple users, all that is repo/org level.

GitHub is centralizing all those features. If GitHub was just for repo hosting, then you would need to link your repo to another platform to do CI, another platform for issue tracking relative to the code, etc.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#348

Post by pojzon »

overfeed wrote: post #200
lelanthran wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, I think the battle is already lost - the nature of copyright and open source code philosophy (currently) means that there isn't any real way of preventing your code being used to train AI. Laws should make it a double-edged sword, make distillation explicitly legal. Not much else they can do.

> Laws should make it a double-edged sword, make distillation explicitly legal. Knowledge-distillation is already legal. Current case law says none of outputs of any model are protected by copyright, so one could use model outputs for whatever they want - including distillation. That is why AI companies resort to ToS clauses to block distillation and/or training competing models.

Its completely 100% legal, to ask LLM to write detailed spec of any closed source project based on the code. Then ask another LLM to implement it to make it public domain.

Its already proven based on previous specification laws.

Hilarious as it sounds its true. We can make “any” code a public domain woth LLMs.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#349

Post by troad »

locknitpicker wrote: post #170
MrFurious wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "social component" is a big problem in actual FOSS.

> The "social component" is a big problem in actual FOSS. You're confusing things. The "social component" refers to people interacting with each other. Such as two developers working on a bug or a feature. Or a tester reporting a bug. This is a big part of actual professional software development work.

To be generous to OP, none of this is intrinsic to FOSS.

I write a library. I put it up online, for other people to use, if they like. At what point did I assume any responsibility to play nice with others? Or work with others at all?

There's FOSS licenses, and then there's the social expectations around collaborative online development, and the latter is nowhere implied in the former.

FOSS was not historically weighed down with all these social expectations. Forking was not seen as some community failure, but the basic purpose of FOSS. Sites like GitHub were a major part of this shift.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#350

Post by troad »

IanCal wrote: post #306
nijave wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Issue tracker, code reviews

Is that what people mean? Just the multi user side of it?

Issue trackers and discussions on FOSS projects are effectively a public forum, and on any public forum people start building brands and identities. Add comment reactions and GitHub stars into the mix and you have a vicarious karma system whereby people's projects jostle in popularity and people try to build reputations. For some people, GitHub is more of a social network than a VCS tool.

GitHub is also somewhat entangled with junior hiring in compsci, meaning there's a tangible economic incentive in building a hireable profile that a recruiter might like. (Or at least that is a widespread belief.)

None of this has much to do with git, the VCS tool, nor is GH-as-a-social-network objectively very important, but it's natural to place outsized importance on a community in which one is active, and there's a significant overlap in the HN commentariat and GH users. So you'll probably hear more about the claimed social utility of GH here than in the real world.

Hope this helps clarify what people are talking about. :)

Post reply on HN