521–530 of 626 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How can someone be so bad at their job that they realize that a bot that writes to the license file needs to avoid overwriting an existing file? A certain degree of malfeasance cannot possibly be explained as incompetence.
or maybe they do not know/they missed that creating a fork from an existing project actually triggers “new repo created” event in the github organization, which has an unintended effect.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I wonder what kind of language you would need to add to your license in order to explicitly forbid the ingestion of your code by Copilot and/or like projects. If Microsoft's theory is correct, under US law it is impossible to forbid this with a license, because a license is just an offer of additional permissions beyond what is available automatically under law, and Microsoft's theory is that ingesting code into Gi…
There's a part that I don't understand. If some software is mirrored on github by someone that isn't the copyright owner, it seems like github shouldn't be able to use it. Yet they said nothing about that specifically. In that case, is the only option to put code somewhere else than github under a license that forbids reuploading to github, and issue DMCAs when/if people reupload your code? It also sounds like when c…
If they don't need permission from the copyright owner, either via license of GitHub T&C, because it's fair use, which is their overt legal theory, then why would it matter legally whether the code was posted to GitHub at all, much less by whom? Ingesting only code form GitHub is a practical convenience that has nothing to do with their legal theory of the right to do it.
> Yet they said nothing about that specifically
Their theory of fair use means they have the right to ingest any code, irrespective of who owns it and what conditions (if any) it is licensed under or where (or even if) it is hosted online. They don't need a separate justification for your scenario if the theory they’ve cited is correct.
> In that case, is the only option to put code somewhere else than github under a license that forbids reuploading to github, and issue DMCAs when/if people reupload your code
Nope, that doesn't help at all, legally; it may help practically as long as they are just using GitHub hosted code and not consuming code from other public hosting platforms, but it has no bearing on their legal theory of why they can ingest code without additional permissions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is my favorite part of the culture change which is happening at Microsoft. We are still working on it. And, it will take time. Jeff's team, my team, the java team whose forked repo this unintentionally highlighted are working with dozens of other teams every week. Satya says we're all in on open source. Hold Jeff and Me and all the leaders of Microsoft to that vision. Keep us accountable. And, know this takes ti…
Quoted post unavailable.
What's surprising to me about all the negative reactions Microsoft receives, especially on here, is that from my point of view, they are currently the most open out of all the big companies (Google, Facebook, Apple, etc). I cannot remember a time Apple has admitted to anything or made any effort to have anything that could be considered open, but they do no wrong in most people's eyes, where even a simple mistake by…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of commenters are sharpening their pitchforks, but this comment, in my opinion, makes it very likely that it was an honest mistake. Amazing what taking personal responsibility and earnestly apologizing can do to restore trust and credibility!
Quoted post unavailable.
The relevant Reddit thread also points out that MSFT has illegally relicensed Apache licensed Apple software in the same way. Apple is very litigious… https://github.com/microsoft/cups
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you. So these are in fact all mistakes. I looked at some of the other forked repos (95 out of 4.5K repos) and all the human commits from MS I saw seem to care about getting the licenses right. So it really is just a broken bot. I hope the bot can be fixed soon and I'm going to put my figurative pitchfork down now.
How can someone be so bad at their job that they realize that a bot that writes to the license file needs to avoid overwriting an existing file? A certain degree of malfeasance cannot possibly be explained as incompetence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How can someone be so bad at their job that they realize that a bot that writes to the license file needs to avoid overwriting an existing file? A certain degree of malfeasance cannot possibly be explained as incompetence.
This is the type of online rage that we as a community need to stamp out. Be better.
https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&type=comment&dateRange=a...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a bot that is supposed to configure the right license when employees start a new repo in the Microsoft GitHub org. It seems the automation is also triggered when Repos are forked into the Microsoft GitHub org which isn't correct behavior. This isn't a deliberate action. If it were plenty of employees (myself included) would be outraged. I assume it's a bug in the bot - an edge case that was not considered. It…
Quoted post unavailable.
Quoted post unavailable.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29683556.