-
In some startups, which have small teams, this is a difficult one to tackle as these people tend to have a “bossy” role, share responsabilities and won’t listen.
-
-
Hopefully this won’t come out as unkind, but the article does seem like an overly long way of saying that “iterable” is what produce “iterators” which you can only walk once. And it’s not actually specific to
range(), so why put it prominently in the title?-
-
I liked the section on how
rangeobjects are more like lazy collections than lazy streams (in that they support containment queries, lengths, etc without consuming the range). Agreed that that was not the majority of the article, but it’s still an interesting little morsel.
-
-
If one doesn’t have too many resources, because for uses an older raspberry pi for example, I can also recommend using Void’s preconfigured image. You even get to choose between glibc and musl. I used to have such a set up, for my personal server, and is was really lightweight, at least for modern standards. A web server, and IRC server, SSH, inetd for FTP and Git cloning, and a few other deamons required barley 10-13 MB of RAM (compared to the 512 MB the system had to offer all together).
-
This setup is probably less resource consuming compared to the one showed in the post; bet the point was to show an easy configuration of a basic Raspberry Pi. For someone new to Linux/similar systems, how complex would you rate the Void installation you mention with those services?
-
-
I guess that is true, I was talking about this more generally. The big downside would probably be a lack of any GUI, even if one would want to have one. All the networking stuff shoud be the same. Other than that, I guess most problems would have an analogous, but of course different, because void uses xbps as compared apt. So generally speaking, I guess considering the potential benefits, if of course one values what void offers (cleaner package management, more minimalist init system, etc.).
But ultimately, I’m not sure if I can really give an unbiased opinion, since it really worked well for me, who has had a bit of experience with linux & co.
-
-
-
acgissues
6 months ago
|
link
| on:
It's perfectly fine to only code at work, don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
I believe not only focusing on what you do at work allows you to be innovative at it, while being able to improve with your constant practice at work and being divergent in your spare time. This is a key fundament on creativity. Do not expect the same every time.
-
Enlightening post. Made me write some lines about the value* that’s shared within social networks, where “stupid” or “smart” opinions are liked without thinking of the effects they have on our society, on our culture.
What’s the use for a connected world where the easiest to adopt and most transmitted message attempts against our cultures and big companies / governments just take advantage of it as the masses move?
-
acgissues
7 months ago
|
link
| on:
Reddit isn't a discussion forum, and neither is Twitter or Discord
Interesting this got posted somewhere with features similar to Reddit’s, but I must agree the commenting model/nesting is not ideal for discussion if they’re not moderated. Such system ends up making new threads on every comment without that “sequence” a forum can offer. Even mail lists get this done pretty well.
I won’t get into instant messaging Discord offers, so as a Twitter user I’ve barely been able to have some real discussion over the platform. Limited posts and nesting makes it similar to Reddit’s offer.
Some will say it all depends, but it’s clear there are advantages for a forum when it comes to discussion, in comparison to platforms like Twitter which are mostly made for diffusion instead.
-
Another item onto the list of stupid, self-sabotaging ideas from Mozilla.
- Cliqz
- Looking Glass
- (Anything else I missed?)
That said, I’m still a Firefox user, because after all, I still trust the Mozilla Foundation and Community more than the makers of the other browser vendors.
-
Mozilla has it’s missteps, on the other hand, they are still better than the other Browser Vendors out there and I haven’t seen a viable Firefox Fork out there that works for me. Plus it seems the Looking Glass addon was inert unless specifically enabled by the user, so I don’t see the harm tbh.
“Atleast [they are] the prettiest pile of shit.” ~ Some quote I heard somewhere
-
-
Original Pocket introduction was mishandled, but since Mozilla owns and operates it now, integration with Firefox makes sense.
-
-
My understanding is, it’s not yet. It’s being worked on. I have no idea what kind of work it takes, but the intention is that it will be fully open sourced.
-
-
-
-
-
-
WebKit is easy to adopt because WebKitGTK and QtWebKit (or whatever it’s called) are well supported and easy to use. And Chromium has CEF. (IIRC Servo is also implementing CEF.)
I don’t think current Gecko is easily embeddable into whatever.
Back in the day Camino on Mac OS was a Gecko browser with a custom Cocoa UI, but doing that today would be way too hard.
-
-
It seems the other way to me? What they’re doing instead is slowly retrofitting pieces of Servo into Gecko piecemeal. (or at least, some kind of Rust equivalent to the C/C++/JS code being replaced) Servo would then be dead or explicitly turned into some staging ground for Gecko.
-
-
-
-
-
I will go beyond alleging a performance improvement, I will attest to it. Surprisingly enough, the improvement includes Google properties such as Gmail and YouTube. They are both more responsive in Firefox now than Chromium or Chrome.
On the extension side, I do not use a large number. Those which I do, however, still function.I freely admit that the plural of anecdote is not “data”, but I would feel remiss not to share how impressed I am with Quantum. Pocket has always annoyed me, so I certainly do not see Mozilla’s actions as unimpeachable and am only giving them credit for Quantum because I feel they deserve it.
-
-
-
-
-
From what I’ve read there’s a misconception on how Go should work. Definitely working with PHP and Go will be different and far from design specifications, PHP was made specifically for web development while Go wasn’t so the workflow/usage itself should be different. If you tackle Go as a web dev language and try to use it from that background, you ARE going to have some troubles getting a hold of it.
-
What a coincidence, I’m also reading UNIX Network Programming by W. Richard Stevens. I’ve been working with Beej’s Networking Programming along with that book.
-
[Comment removed by author]
-
Yeah you can be direct without being a dick. “I won’t merge something that breaks the kernel, please find some other way.” would have worked just fine.
-
And in fact, that’s how it works most of the time.
Linus’ reputation as an asshole is due, in part, to selection bias, and the high profile of Linux. Thousands and thousands of merges go into the kernel all the time without a problem, and without Linus going off on a rant.
I don’t work on the kernel, but my observation has been that the big blow ups seem to only come after people repeatedly break the rules. I won’t say Linus handles it well, but I don’t think he’s as bad as some maintainers in some smaller open source communities.
-
It’s survivor bias, not selection bias. He also owes a lot of it to businesses that got his kernel out there plus make up a lot of contributions. It’s not as if him being an asshole combined with some FOSS contributors that loved that asshole equals success of Linux.
-
-
I don’t think that’s strictly true.
I think there are a few salient points here:
- If you just go by his posts that make it to lobste.rs/hacker news/reddit, you’ll get an extremely skewed view of Linus’s attitude. The vast majority of his communications are somewhere between polite and blunt. (Remember, his job basically entails reading and writing emails all day every day, and he writes something social-media worthy at most monthly.) To the best of my knowledge, he’s never exploded at a kernel newbie, only at long-time kernel hackers.
- That said, his attitude is still incredibly problematic. It’s been demonstrated to drive away talented developers. It drives away new developers, even if they are not themselves directly getting yelled at by Linus.
- Linux’s success is a complicated beast dependent on a whole host of factors, including to varying extents all of good timing (a few years later and BSD would have made it through its legal troubles), technical talent, corporate support, sheer dumb luck. Linus’s attitude certainly had an impact, but where it slots in that long list is impossible to say; I think it was a negative factor and thus, based on Linux’s evident success, had a relatively low impact, but obviously that’s pure speculation.
-
Even adding in that first bullet from you and jlarocco, I think I still agree with about everything you said. It’s consistent with my position that he goes too far with the bad stuff.
-
-
I have never ever behaved this way to my colleagues, and I suspect you haven’t either. So to call it selection bias is to ignore that he’s doing something that the vast majority of us would be fired for. It’s not okay to rarely shout down your coworkers. Sure it’s better to do it rarely than every single day, but the fact that we keep examples of this is a clear example that he has no checks and balances.
-
-
-
-
The only thing I’m getting tired of is people pulling the odd email out of thousands and wringing hands over how mean Old Man Linus is.
Maybe folks should reflect on how, after 25 years of loud and blatant protestations by Linus, fucking morons keep trying to merge the same types of userspace breaking bugs.
Maybe, sometimes, a broader more accepting tent isn’t the answer.
-
-
-
-
Professionally “rewarding”, still toxic at the personal end. It’s mentioned in this article mentioned at the main link.
And little of value was lost. This is how Sarah Sharp tried to publicly humiliate the guy with a wife and daughter - https://lwn.net/Articles/559077/ :
*Snort*. Perhaps we haven’t interacted very often, but I have never seen you be nice in person at KS. Well, there was that one time you came to me and very quietly explained you had a problem with your USB 3.0 ports, but you came off as “scared to talk to a girl kernel developer” more than “I’m trying to be polite”.
I disagree with labelling things and people as “toxic” in general, but I’ll choose Linus over Sarah any day: https://linux.slashdot.org/story/15/10/05/2031247/linux-kernel-dev-sarah-sharp-quits-citing-brutal-communications-style
-
Did we read the same mail? Did you read any of the quoted parts from Linus? A guy that refuses to even consider treating people with respect is a clear-cut asshole. I’d much rather work with someone that talks about treating people with dignity than someone that refuses to consider the concept seriously.
-
[Comment from banned user removed]
-
You got it backward. Linus is the special snowflake here if he can continue to be that unnecessarily-abusive publicly with no consequences just because his work just happened to get popular in that way. Expecting people to deliver constructive criticism or not chase away good talent is the default for those managing good teams in most places. A manager/leaser simply getting off on abusing those doing work is adding nothing of value to the project in doing so.
Instead of a snowflake, people just expect to be treated with decency by default with shitflakes like Linus able to get away with being exceptional jerks.
-
[Comment from banned user removed]
-
That would be a good trait if he had it. Instead, he’s still pushing monoliths in unsafe languages with limited metaprogramming. Took forever to get it reliable versus Minix 3’s a few developers in a few years. So much for his decisions being merit-based. ;)
-
he’s still pushing monoliths in unsafe languages with limited metaprogramming
Linux is modular.
There was no serious alternative to C back in 1991 and, as much as I love metaprogramming, it increases the amount of surprises for the programmer.
Took forever to get it reliable versus Minix 3’s a few developers in a few years.
It’s easy to be reliable when your biggest deployment is on Intel’s spy chip.
Minix was little more than an emulator pet for a few CS students, before that. Low on drivers, low on performance, low on functionality. You might as well compare Linux with L4…
-
It’s modular in kernel mode for full compromise and crash potential. There were a bunch of memory-safe languages used in other OS’s before 1991, esp from Wirth, whose safety could be selectively disabled. Worst case compile them to C to leverage compilers while dodging programmer-related problems like some projects did.
“It’s easy to be reliable when your biggest deployment is on Intel’s spy chip.”
DOD is one of Red Hat’s biggest customers and sources of funding for contributions to Linux. Lots of kernel bugs were also found by analysis and testing tools from CompSci similarly funded by US-government. I agree that helps but a company just freeloaded off Minix 3. Should’ve went with GPL.
“Minix was little more than an emulator pet for a few CS students, before that. Low on drivers, low on performance, low on functionality. “
You should’ve seen the first Linux. It was similar but crashed more. Meanwhile, several years earlier than 1991, QNX folks were building a microkernel-based UNIX that became reliable as hell, fast, and deterministic. The Playbook versus iPad comparisons were the first I got to see with multimedia after BeOS. In both, the multithreading without stalling abilities were mindboggling versus the better-funded, older competition. My Linux systems can still come to a crawl over misbehaved applications to this day. Things that the others made highly unlikely with better architecture.
You’re arguments were who used it and features that came with labor put in. Either one of those put into better architecture would’ve made an even better Linux. So, they’re neutral points. Mine was Linus wouldn’t listen anyway. If you believed him in Linus vs Tannenbaum, things like the Playbook w/ QNX and BeOS would’ve been impossible to program easily or perform well. Way wrong cuz he’s about politics and arbitrary preferences as much as merit. Like most developers.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
It has, though?
What I meant was that newcomers seem to be ignoring 25 years of norms and others being surprised when those newcomers–who are doing dumb things–are told to knock it off.
-
-
Thanks for the clarification, and agreed.
-
-
-
Linux is the most successful, widespread operating system kernel of all time. You can say the man’s rude, but you can’t say the results demonstrate unproductivity.
-
The others from Microsoft, Apple, and IBM also were driven by assholes who were greedy on top of it. Just throwing that in there even though Im anti-Linus in this debate.
-
-
-
There’s honestly no good reason to be hostile. It doesn’t actually help reduce the problem, evidenced by the fact that what he has done hasn’t worked. Instead they need processes for check in, code reviews, and linters. Linus should be delegating more as well if this is bothering him so much.
-
-
What he’s done hasn’t worked. Most contributions are from businesses. Many good talent say they avoid it. That seems to be evidence of something. Meanwhile, the Rust crowd managed to get piles of people early on for one of the hardest-to-learn languages I’ve seen in a while. They used the opposite approach. Now, two projects or even ten aren’t a lot of datapoints for an empirical assessment of which method is working. Oh, what can we do to see how much or how little damage Linus is doing to kernel in terms of lost contributions?
Oh wait, it turns out researchers in universities have been doing both observational studies and surveys on large numbers of organizations and people for decades covering this very thing. A key question was which management styles have most positive impact. One thing that’s pretty consistent in the research is that people working for assholes were much more likely to half-ass their work on purpose, dodge doing work, or even sabotage that person where possible. People working for those that treated them with respect or constructive criticism did better work. That kept being a result of most studies. Crazy to ignore decades of consistency in human behavior when trying to decide how best to treat them in a FOSS project for achieving goals such as more contributors, higher-quality contributions, and so on.
The theory supported by the evidence is that Linus’ style when doing what’s in the OP is unnecessarily rude and destructive. The evidence says he’ll loose a lot of talent since that talent just needs a worthwhile project to work on rather than his project. Just like he feels he doesn’t need them. Objectively, such a result is bad for the project if one wants it to improve. He might be willing to sacrifice features, QA, and so on for the personal enjoyment of those insults. That is what he’s doing. Anyone defending him shouldn’t pretend otherwise. Instead, they should shift to their actual argument of “I know we’re losing contributors that could’ve made the Linux kernel even better. The main reason is Linus’s personal preference. We think that’s a good status quo to maintain because…” That does look to be a harder position to defend, though, on either technical or moral grounds.
-
-
I’m too much of an overloaded procrastinator to give it to you. I’d have to resurvey it as I bet the Web 1.0 sites are gone, new ones have formed, and I’ll have to dig through tons of noise. I do plan to either find or do another meta study on that in future since it’s so critical. For IT, I always told people to read the PeopleWare book and Dale Carnegie’s How to Win Friends and Influence People. Lots of managers hand out the latter believing it’s great advice. Implies they think blunt assholes are non-ideal. The No Asshole Rule book also cited a bunch of studies on effects of people being assholes downward or upward in an organizations recommending against it.
I do need to recollect the studies, though. Plus do a new bookmarking solution I’ve been procrastinating on since Firefox is full to point it constantly looses bookmarks lol.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
If you’re going to be derogatory, safe space is properly mocking.
There is a near infinite gap between “let the noods do whatever they want to the codebase” and “don’t degrade people’s character because they submitted a PR you dislike”.
I guess some people are just more tolerant of a project leader taking their anger and frustration out on people trying to get involved?
-
The problem isn’t that he wouldn’t merge the person’s code. The problem is the unprofessional way that he treats other people. The fact that you think the problem is that he wouldn’t merge the code is either deeply concerning or purposefully avoiding the issue.
-
If you actually read the damn thread, you see that Linus actually explained this pretty clearly: http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1711.2/01357.html
The person decides to ignore Linus and Linus gets angry, I really don’t see a problem here.
-
Ok, I read the full thread. It’s more reasonable in the other parts. Kees seems to have put some work into making it acceptable. Later on, I see someone do what Linus should’ve done in the first place in giving specific details about where he’s coming from in a way that wouldn’t have bothered me as a contributor:
http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1711.2/03732.html
After seeing that, I’m more annoyed by whoever was half-assing security contributions to the kernel so much that it will be hard for worthwhile contributions to get in.
-
Yeah, same here - I think there are just special snowflakes who think that human psychology has anything to do with whether or not the kernel is going to continue running reliably for me, the kernel user. Guess what snowflakes, nobody cares about the feelings if the product doesn’t work.
Not to mention, this is only the squeaky wheel - Linus has been nice and professional and accommodating many, many times over. Many more times over, in fact. It just never makes the news ..
-
-
-
-
-
-
Nope. I think he’s great. And I’m very glad that he is stewarding the Linux project to this day. Whether you think its ‘nice’ or not, his management of the Linux kernel has produced superlative results - and sometimes, in the thick of the mob, you have to be an asshole to get people to work the way they need to work to continue producing quality results.
What I am sick of, is petulant snowflakes who think they know better than Linus how to manage the 1000’s of developers that want to have their fingers in the pie. The kernel doesn’t care about your feelings, and neither do 99.9999% of the kernels really important people: its users.
-
Since when did asking to be treated with the bare minimum of basic human decency become a “special snowflake” thing? Nobody wants Linus to write “You’re so wonderful, and special, and beautiful, but I cannot accept this patch because, despite how wonderful and unique it and you are, it just won’t work with Linux’s performance requirements.”
NOBODY is asking for that. So I don’t get why I keep seeing “special snowflake” thrown around. I guess it’s just a strawman? (OH WAIT I GET IT NOW!)
Notice how your comment is verging on “nobody can critique the way Linus runs the project (that we all rely on in myriad ways)”. Aren’t snowflakes the ones who want to shut people down and stop discussion? Isn’t it the “snowflakes” that want to prevent people from having to hear mean things? (Like, stop taking your anger out on contributors because you’re not 7 anymore).
Doesn’t it kind of seem like–and bear with me here, I know it hurts–that you’ve become the special snowflake? Stifling discussion, needing a space where someone you look up to is immune to criticism, insulting people who are just trying to have a conversation?
Isn’t it your post that seems to be the petulant one here?
-
Since when did asking to be treated with the bare minimum of basic human decency become a “special snowflake” thing?
Precisely at the point where well-established ground rules, respected by the rest of us, were continually broken with no regard for the work load incurred, nor the hassle of having to deal with all the noise. Or did you miss the part where known, functional, productive policies were repeatedly ignored in the rush to get this patch included in the next release?
Its one thing for a contributor to feel like they should be treated with respect as a special snowflake whose feelings are more important than the work, or in this case non-work, that they are contributing to the lives of others; its another thing to respect the very foundations of the activity from which one is attempting to derive that respect in ones own life.
Perhaps you missed the part where this could have been a disaster for the Linux kernel, and a lot of time was wasted having to deal with it, since the original developer decided to ignore the policies, well-since established as being necessary to the task of managing the Kernel patch integration process?
“nobody can critique the way Linus runs the project (that we all rely on in myriad ways)”
Well, whether you like it or not, its the truth: Linus has guided the way through decades of these kinds of events, and we have an extraordinarily powerful tool that has revolutionised computers as a result. Perhaps you ought to consider whether the quality of your own work and contributions might improve if you harden up a little and don’t take offence so easily. Time and again, this proves to be true - in the real world and in this fantasy land we’re currently sharing as participants in this thread.
The poster involved in this incident seems to have accepted that they were, in fact, violating a fundamental policy of the Linux kernel developer group, and has addressed the issue in a way that moves things forward - how, exactly, would Linux kernel development be pushed forward by your insistence at being treated like a snowflake?
A mistake was made - the policy was not followed - and Linus jumped on the guy. He’ll never do it again, many many others have also learned the importance of the check-in policy (Rule #1: Don’t Break The Kernel.) and he doesn’t seem at all worse for the wear, personally, as a consequence; its really only folks such as yourself who are getting so easily upset about this, because Linus somehow doesn’t conform to your particular cultural ideal.
Perhaps you haven’t been following Linux kernel development for long, or with much attention - there are many, many counter-cases of Linus having great relations with the developer group, which don’t seem to figure into your equation that “Linus is rude”. He’s precisely rude when he needs to be, and an awesome, polite, respectful individual, all the while. Please try to avail yourself of that truth before you continue ad-hoc insults and insinuations against random Internet strangers. It hurts my feelings to be challenged by an ignoramus.
Doesn’t it kind of seem like–and bear with me here, I know it hurts–that you’ve become the special snowflake?
Are you assuming that I wouldn’t want to be called a snowflake when appropriate? Because, I’m quite a snowflake, and often, when its appropriate or otherwise. Absolutely nothing with being called one, when you are one. Or, is there some other kind of kettle we should be boiling for tea?
-
-
-
-
In all sincerity here, what would it mean for a person to say, “I’m not going to tolerate this behavior?”
Linus would still own the Linux trademark. He’d still control the mainline kernel repo. The “lieutenants” that manage various areas of the kernel would still control those areas and report to him. It seems very unlikely that they would support a coup. (Anyone who had a major problem with Linus’ behavior wouldn’t have lasted long enough to get one of the top positions.)
As a user, you can choose not to use or support Linux. But as a user, you don’t get to change the way the project runs.
I think the most extreme option you’d have would be to fork the source code and try to attract both a large developer community and a large user base on the basis of running a more inclusive community. But there’s a chicken-and-egg problem to that approach.
There’s an implicit hypothesis that says, “A more inclusive community will produce a better kernel.” Let’s assume that proves to be true. Some users would switch on that basis alone, but most will wait to see practical benefits. Since it would still take time for a fork to produce tangible benefits, you’d have to attract developers and users with the promise alone. We have a small set of cases to examine, where a major open source project was forked with the intention of creating a better community. It appears that the majority of users will hang back with a “wait and see” approach.
I really don’t know what kind of negative feedback anyone could apply to Linus that would have an effect.
-
-
This behaviour would violate the code of conduct of any sensible project.
Maybe you should run a kernel made by the CoC crowd. I’ll stick with the foul-mouthed guy.
-
The only one I know off top of head is Redox OS since it used Rust CoC. It’s got potential but is alpha software. All the rest that are good seem to be made with different philosophies with a range of civility.
I am interested if anyone knows of another usable OS made with all activity enforced with a CoC a la Rust/Redox. At least the basic console or GUI apps so it’s usable for some day to day stuff.
-
-
Good catch. This one…
“There can be no place within the FreeBSD Community for discriminatory speech or action. We do not believe anyone should be treated any differently based on who they are, where they are from, where their ancestors were from, what they look like, what gender they identify as, who they choose to sleep with, how old they are, their physical capabilities or what sort of religious beliefs they may hold. What matters is the contribution they are able to make to the project, and only that.”
…is where the politically-motivated try to find a lot of wiggle room for censorship as beliefs vary. One reason I collect these is so we can look back at data in commits or on forums to see what impact they have. Note I said OS that was made with the activity enforced this way. Some could have it added as an evolution of moderation policies well after it’s a successful project that was built on a different philosophy. How long has that CoC been in FreeBSD?
-
-
Ok, so it’s not an example of an OS developed under the CoC. It was a highly-mature OS that probably started with really different kinds of people just because they were the norm for early days of BSD’s and Linux. With your comment, they were just using common sense of ejecting folks who were obviously abusive without anything more formal or constraining. That still leaves Redox as the only one I know that had the policy and supporters of it from the start.
The main way I think this can be tested is with frameworks or libraries that are in same language and crowd. Basically, keep the situation as close as possible so about the only strong variable is community style. Should be easier with libraries or frameworks since they’re more accessible to new contributors. People are always doing more of those.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Reading to understand the TCP/IP stack, before trying to develop a user-mode stack. Also continue with sockets programming, which I started last week. This time I’m going to look at the server side. It’s also helping me with the TCP/IP reading.
-
For TCP I liked the blog posts that Julia Evans did about them.
You probably already know that but a classic for Socket programming is Beej’s Networking Guide.
-
GitHub are, of course, a company that thrives from content creators acting as sharecroppers on their centralised hosting platform. The dichotomy of “freedom to post whatever you want to GitHub” vs “OMG the Fahrenheit 451 future of Europe” is a false one, because you can post your open source project’s code to your open source project’s GitLab, Kallithea, or other instance. GitHub are downplaying that alternative so that “freedom” is recast as “the freedom for GitHub to have all your codes”.
Wouldn’t this legislation apply to Gitlab or any other alternative as well?
Wait, my hard drive can store stuff too, now we need to add copyright detection to virus scanner a too!
http://walkingdead.wikia.com/wiki/File:85351-Dale-shhh-gif-The-Walking-Dead-PzRw.gif
I can run my own gitlab, I cannot run my own github. If I run my own gitlab then I can know that only my own project code is hosted on the gitlab.
And what, you don’t plan to ever collaborate with anyone? You don’t plan to ever use any open-source libraries written by others? You’re sure you aren’t going to hit any false positives? How do you think Gitlab is being built for your use? Pointing out OP’s self-interest doesn’t actually replace addressing its criticisms.
If this goes through, copyright trolls will become a thing. Get a lawyer, squat on some maximally general pattern of bits, and now projects can’t upload stuff matching it without paying you.
If he sets up public repositories people can contribute code to his repository on his own Gitlab instance.
i run my own gitlab for my software projects, people join there to collaborate or send me patches via email / pastebin.
You got the point here. GitHub is trying to stay in a grey area instead so people won’t move away from their services, “supporting” both freedom and law by passing the ball to us with their Call to Action.
They explicitly mention that for smaller players introduction of content upload filters would be even more burdensome. And also they don’t mention it, it’s obvious that GitHub of all companies would have the resources to implement such a thing. So I don’t see why you try to cast it as GitHub caring only for themselves.
Besides, “listen to what’s being said, not who’s saying”. The concern is valid and well articulated. Any attempt from copyright mongers to tax another human activity is counterproductive to progress and should be stopped.
[Comment removed by author]
Sorry, where did you get that? :-) It’s neither in the text, nor in my comment.
[Comment removed by author]
Let’s assume you’re not trolling me on purpose here…
They is GitHub. I did say GitHub would be the least affected themselves by such a law:
I did not say they “are the best people to solve this problem”. It’s just a completely different thing.