4 ms·
> Reading some copyrighted code can have you entirely excluded from some jobs What provision of copyright law are you referring to? Are you conflating copyrigh
by dahart 5y ago
> Reading some copyrighted code can have you entirely excluded from some jobs
What provision of copyright law are you referring to? Are you conflating copyright law with arbitrary organizational policies?
- chrisseaton 5y agoWho said it was a law?
- dahart 5y agoWhich “it” are you referring to? @lacker was talking about copyright in the comment @jcelerier replied to.
- chrisseaton 5y agoYeah... but they didn't say it was the law that got you excluded from working on some projects from reading copyright code. It's corporate policy that does that - it's not a law but they do it based on who owns the copyright. Not everything that impacts you is a law. They said > Reading some copyrighted code can have you entirely excluded from some jobs And they're right. It's because of corporate policies. They never said it was because of a law - you imagined that out of nothing.
- dahart 5y ago> They never say it was because of a law - you imagined that out of nothing. @jcelerier flatly contradicted the statement that copyright doesn’t prevent you from reading something. You’re right that @jceleier didn’t say their example was law, that’s because the example is a straw man in the context of what @lacker wrote.
- chrisseaton 5y agoAre you editing your comments out after they're been replied to? That's really poor form.
- dahart 5y agoI did not edit my comments above after reading your replies, why do you ask? What do you think I changed that affected how the thread reads? And, who says improving or clarifying a comment is poor form? What is the edit button for, and why is it available once replies have been posted?
- chrisseaton 5y ago> What do you think I changed I think you added > Which “it” are you referring to?... Because I have a tab open and can see the old one!
- dahart 5y agoI added that before I saw your comment. So?
- hluska 5y agoSo @chrisseaton was correct, you did edit your posts and their question was in good faith. Edit - I’m adding another point as an edit to show another way to communicate. Would any of your points been lost had you done something similar?
- dahart 5y ago> So @chrisseaton was correct No that’s not true. I did not edit my posts after reading their reply, and the false accusation was that I changed my comment after it was replied to. I didn’t challenge whether the question was in good faith, but I’ll just note that the relevant discussion of copyright got dropped in favor of an ad-hominem attack. My question of which “it” was being referred to is a legitimate question that I believe clarified the intent of my comment, and I added it to make clear I was talking about what @lacker said, not what @jcelerier wrote. > Edit - I’m adding another point as an edit to show another way to communicate. Would any of your points been lost had you done something similar? This doesn’t answer my question of why an edit should not be made before I see any replies, nor of why any edit is “poor form” and according to whom. I made my edit immediately. I’m well aware of the practice of calling out edits with a note, I’ve done it many times. I don’t feel the need to call out every typo or clarification with an explicit note, especially when edited very soon after the original comment.