71–80 of 84 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Github is owned by Microsoft, and was purchased for ~8 billion dollars.
Microsoft purchased Github as a business decision for the purpose of turning a profit, not for the purpose of running a charity for political means.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This comment is deeply ironic and lacking in self awareness. >take YOUR politics outside, and make more room for MINE. The only ones trying to enforce political opinions on software development are those who claim the status quo is broken. Those who push for vague COCs as political tools to oust anyone with inappropriate opinions. People who put developer feelings over merit and productivity. The rest, and majority,…
> The rest, and majority, of us are just trying to write code. This comment is a really embarrassing commentary on how the US education system's emphasis on tech and STEM has crippled our critical thinking. If you're working at github, you're literally constructing the tools used to terrorize communities. You can't do that in an "apolitical" way. Your actions are political. We feel the same way about the companies th…
These open source projects certainly love the very high quality, free services Github offers them, until they start learning how the sausage is made. ICE has done, and continues to do some terrible things. Horrible, horrible things; all legal things, but nonetheless horrible. But, frankly, if its legal, I am much less comfortable with Github's users subverting the US legal system by backdooring their moral code into…
Hopefully this argument will die soon. You don't hear anyone talking about how Google should be treated as a charity because the price of their search engine and YouTube is $0. Nor do you hear it about Facebook. Nor do you hear it about any other marketing campaigns by anyone else. That's their business model. What really bugs me when someone says this about Github is that Github added closed infrastructure on top of an open source project. Without open source projects giving them the product and then the free marketing, they sure as hell wouldn't have sold for $7.5 billion. Open source projects don't also have to be forever in the debt of Github as well, do they?
I'm not going to comment on the rest of your argument, but your opening sentence is really weak.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a crucial point. Status quo sycophants tell us to "take politics outside," but what they mean is "take YOUR politics outside, and make more room for MINE." Politics is money and power. Tech is money and power. Tech is politics. And anyone who says otherwise is trying to undermine your power by obscuring this reality.
This comment is deeply ironic and lacking in self awareness. >take YOUR politics outside, and make more room for MINE. The only ones trying to enforce political opinions on software development are those who claim the status quo is broken. Those who push for vague COCs as political tools to oust anyone with inappropriate opinions. People who put developer feelings over merit and productivity. The rest, and majority,…
Well... them, and those who claim the status quo is working.
The room does not disappear when you close your eyes, and a randomly wired neural network still has bias.[1]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/attorney-general-announces-ze... To act like nothing has changed under Trump is ignorant. To pretend that it would matter is disingenuous. No administration is called out in this repository. Saying "Well, it's too late, because you didn't complain about it under the last administration" is meaningless.
No, it is meaningful. It shows that the signatories are virtue signaling based on political animus, and dont care one bit for any supposed victims, severely hurting their credibility.
a) It's not even true. I pointed to a literal policy for this administration, which has been absolutely central to the controversy.
b) Even if it were the case, your issue is with the media, not the protestors. If I find out tomorrow that there's a problem, it is not really important to me that the problem began under X or Y administration, but that it persists under the current one.
c) You claim simultaneously that the media is biased and only covering the topic now, but then somehow blame people for only learning about the issue and caring about it now. Your issue is with the media, and that's fine, but it's not relevant to this at all. If you want to put the media on blast go nuts, this topic has nothing to do with the media or this administration.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The rest, and majority, of us are just trying to write code. This comment is a really embarrassing commentary on how the US education system's emphasis on tech and STEM has crippled our critical thinking. If you're working at github, you're literally constructing the tools used to terrorize communities. You can't do that in an "apolitical" way. Your actions are political. We feel the same way about the companies th…
Yeah, it's always embarrassing to read topics like this and remember that, for the most part, the people in your field are basically braindead codemonkeys.
We're more than happy to debug nearly endless stack traces, but tracing the stack of our customers' and suppliers is, somehow, a threat to the foundations of our identity as good people, purely vocational talent.
We're too steeped in the California Ideology [1].
1. https://www.metamute.org/editorial/articles/californian-ideo...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, fine, but I disagree and I'd like to tell the CEO that I don't share his moral framework. Why is sending him a letter an inappropriate channel?
Go for it! I didn't say it was an inappropriate channel (that was a GP post). I do think it's misguided and against the spirit of open source software though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Go for it! I didn't say it was an inappropriate channel (that was a GP post). I do think it's misguided and against the spirit of open source software though.
Does it make it anymore acceptable when a cashier is robbed or shot and killed on duty that the store is located in a high crime area? Jobs will be filled by someone. That never excuses abuses towards them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How would that even work? I imagine GitHub has a pretty typical sales department right now, with salesfolks who try to make deals selling licenses to anyone willing to buy (with perhaps a handful of well-understood exceptions, like no sales to Iran or North Korea). If they add an ethical vetting layer in there, ok, sure this one is an easy call. But people will continue to complain about other government agencies, fo…
>but I'm not sure spending significant amounts of time investigating organizations and adjudicating the results and deciding You don't need to do any of that, just wait and let the angry mob tell you who to not do business with.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does it make it anymore acceptable when a cashier is robbed or shot and killed on duty that the store is located in a high crime area? Jobs will be filled by someone. That never excuses abuses towards them.
I'm having a hard time understanding your reply. I don't think anyone is talking about Github being abusive to employees.