Please remove mitsuhiko/* • Hacker News Board

Re: Please remove mitsuhiko/*

#441

Post by davesque » Sun, Nov 02, 2014, 8:42 PM UTC

teamhappy wrote: post #25

jedanbik wrote: post #11

This is gross to read because it's really about consent.

I disagree. He explicitly consented to everybody doing whatever they want with the software. I just don't think it's fair to allow people to do one thing and then make them feel bad about it once they do it. --- Let me clarify a couple of things here so I don't have to write short replies to all of you. Let's start with the 3-clause-BSD license. It states that you aren't allowed to use the names of the contributors t…

I think you're right. In spite of the many good points that people are debating with this issue, there's clearly a witch-hunt dynamic going on here. I'm seeing a lot of comments with perfectly valid opinions getting down-voted just because people don't agree with them. I think people just need to sit this one out and let the actual stake holders work it out.

Re: Please remove mitsuhiko/*

#442

Post by backdraw_ » Sun, Nov 02, 2014, 9:13 PM UTC

wyager wrote: post #418

lotsofmangos wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cost per transaction of $19 is a fair amount of friction - https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transaction

>Cost per transaction of $19 is a fair amount of friction Haha, I have no idea what that chart is talking about. It might be in cents. Even then, it seems expensive. My phone client uses a ~$0.05 fee, I think. All fees are optional. Your transaction might just take longer without one.

There are about 500 transactions per block; each block contains 25BTC + fees (the fees are negligible at the moment). At the current price of $350/BTC that means that the revenue per transaction is 25*350/500 = $17, which means that the cost per transaction should be around that area. This means that the low transaction fee is actually massively subsidized by the fixed block reward.

Re: Please remove mitsuhiko/*

#443

Post by nemetroid » Sun, Nov 02, 2014, 9:58 PM UTC

GhotiFish wrote: post #288

eordano wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that the project is a bad idea because you can't impersonate me and take donations in my name without my consent, no matter which currency is being used.

Can you explain how they have given that impression? I still don't fully understand what's going on here, but my first impression (Which seems to be the issue you have, that they are masquarading or implying that they are operating on behalf of the developer) is that they let people put bounties on bugs. That means they are independent and third party and in no way necessarily affiliated with the project. I understoo…

The big text on the landing page says

> Contribute to Open Source

> Donate bitcoins to open source projects or make commits and get tips for it.

The language used is "donate to projects". If you click the "See projects" button, you get to a page with the header "Supported projects", which suggests some kind of agreement between the project and Tip4Commit.

If you click a project, you get to a page with text like "Project sponsors", and even "No sponsors yet. Be the first to support this project.". The implied "... on Tip4Commit" part is not obvious.

The only thing suggesting that Tip4Commit is not affiliated with the projects is a low-contrast message at the bottom of each page, which was added after this blew up.

Re: Please remove mitsuhiko/*

#444

Post by mjuchli » Tue, Nov 11, 2014, 5:45 PM UTC

I started a project called Issue-Bidder (https://issue-bidder.com/) with the same concept before I even knew that bountysource (and meanwhile also tip4commit) existed. I do not collect any repositories from Github but rather let the users manually submit a repo to Issue-Bidder. And at this point I think there is only one reason why bountysource does the opposite: For marketing reason – or better let's say this straight-out: the intention to make money. Guess what, the opensource community (speaking as a set of all specific communities) is a high potential and open market. Everybody is able to move mountains if you're ruthless enough. Let's just take this post on reddit as an example: http://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/comments/2dsvme/someone_stol... and I'm sure tons of other example cases exist out there. In my opinion we can compare bountysource and all the other vultures out there with the financial brokers back in the 90' (why did I even set a filter to the 90' anyways?). Should we now all hate them? Or are we now just hating around because we are naive and didn't restrict all our repos and do believe in the positive aspects of this high potential market called opensource?

Re: Please remove mitsuhiko/*

#445

Post by scotty79 » Thu, Nov 13, 2014, 9:58 PM UTC

meepmorp wrote: post #318

scotty79 wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just did. What a bizarre construct. Totally unenforceable. You'll get 'civil forfeiture'-d 50 times at random before IRS will charge you with that and wins. Besides it's not uncashed check. It's verbal (or even virtual) promise made by person in another country. If Nigerian prince offers you 500000$ you just need to claim do you have to pay taxes on that?

> I just did. What a bizarre construct. Totally unenforceable. Y Oh, well thank god for that. Whoever might have legal issues with this can just tell the relevant authorities in their country that scotty79 on HN says it's bizarre and totally unenforceable, and that'll shut them right up, won't it. And, also, hey who gives a shit if the people involved in the various projects want their project associated with this. I…

> Whoever might have legal issues with this can just tell the relevant authorities in their country that scotty79 on HN says it's bizarre and totally unenforceable, and that'll shut them right up, won't it.

Yup. Btw that someone won't care because that will be the day when that someone will get struck by lightning three times, once after each meal, so he'll have much more to worry about.