5 ms·

Unsure if it's the incompetence of the the cover up or the actual violation that's more bothersome for me.

by ctvo 5y ago

Barrin92 5y ago
>the incompetence i mean let's be real who is ever going to work for this thing, the amount of qualified engineers who are going to sign up for Trump's Mastodon media clone you can probably count on one hand. Which might arguably be the biggest problem all of these companies are going to have, how are these people ever going to find actual developers
- dymk 5y ago
  I guarantee you there are plenty of smart, capable, clever engineers willing (and likely motivated by sincerer personal belief) to work on Trump's Mastodon media clone. I'm not one of them, but I also put active effort into not letting my social spheres from taint my view of "the other"'s ability too much.
  - hairofadog 5y ago
    I'm certain you're right that there are a lot of talented engineers with political philosophies all over the spectrum, many of whom I would whole-heartedly disagree with. However, Trump and the folks in his immediate circle seem to drive away competence through a special combination of malice, selfishness, pettiness, projection, and short-sightedness that boggles the mind. Set aside ideology for a minute; it seems like not paying the bills is standard procedure for their organization, and I don't know who would stand for it regardless of their ideology.
    - darksaints 5y ago
      There are very few of Trump's allies that would ever work for him, either as an employee or a contractor. They can see his modus operandi clear as day. And yet somehow there are always suckers that he can convince to do his shit for free. Of course there is a promise of payment, but the check never arrives.
    - dymk 5y ago
      Absolutely, the Truth platform will likely fail due to inept management, legal troubles, learning that moderation is actually a hard problem, etc. I just want GGP to know that there are plenty of smart people willing to work on such a project (assuming they get paid) - and I want to combat this idea that the "other side" is just a bunch of bumbling bozos who don't know the difference between a bit and a byte. There's likely also a small number of people who would work on this just because they believe in Trump's ideology, and would like to see Truth exist more than they'd like to get paid on a regular basis.
- tlear 5y ago
  There is a massive pool of engineers that if payed FAANG*1.1 salary would work on anything. As long as they set salaries correctly they will not have any issues recruiting talent. You also seriously underestimate number of people pissed off about having spout the latest woke tropes to continue being employed at FAANG, those will go for much lower rate.
- dylan604 5y ago
  What? Half of the country voted for this guy. That's a pretty large pool of people to pull from for future employees.
  - greggturkington 5y ago
    Only ~60% of eligible US voters voted in 2016 and 2020, Trump lost the popular vote both times, "half of the country" did not vote for him.
    - dylan604 5y ago
      74+ million did which worked out to 46.9%. That's pretty close to 50% for discussion purposes. That's a large pool of potential employees.
      - qkqk 5y ago
        That's about 22.5% of the country, not half.
        dylan604 5y ago
        Might I interest you in a course on statistics and how smaller samplings can be used to extrapolate larger sets?
        KittenInABox 5y ago
        Then the correct statement would be "half the country would've voted for this guy, based on the number of people who did vote".
      - dragonwriter 5y ago
        > 74+ million did which worked out to 46.9%. Not of the country it didn't.
  - rsynnott 5y ago
    I'm not sure half of them would want to _work_ for him, though. He doesn't exactly have a stellar reputation as an employer.
- ctvo 5y ago
  It feels like they outsourced this, or hired the people willing to do the work most cheaply. More likely they hired the people in their network who had any experience in this space and hoped for the best (Bill was director of engineering for a regional bank? He knows people, right?). I don't doubt there would be engineers willing to work on this if 1) the pay was right 2) the culture was right. Do they have the executives in place who know how to set those two things to attract the best engineers? All signs point to no.
randombits0 5y ago
Could you point to the violation please? I don’t see how users would be entitled to their modified software if they do not distribute it. Using the software is not distribution. Or is it?
- rsynnott 5y ago
  That would be the case if it was under boring ol' normal GPLv3. However, it is not; it's under the AGPL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affero_General_Public_License https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affero_General_Public_License If they've changed it at all, they'll need to release that.
  - randombits0 5y ago
    So if my users are my customers or employees, this license would make the product unusable. Maybe. Where’s the line? The product provides my content, in the form of html/css/JavaScript/whatever. That’s technically software/copyrightable but isn’t a component of the AGPLed product. Otherwise, I agree that the AGPL would require distribution of software mods to the product. I can’t imagine why they would modify or how the author would detect such modifications. Sorry, but I’m still having trouble understanding just what modifications are being discussed. Nothing I’ve read yet talks about specifics. There should at least be a smoking gun, no? Otherwise, post a link to the product and you’re done.
    - rsynnott 5y ago
      > So if my users are my customers or employees, this license would make the product unusable. No, not at all; you'd simply have to release the changes you make. For the purposes of this article, your 'users' are anyone who interacts with the software. > Sorry, but I’m still having trouble understanding just what modifications are being discussed. Nothing I’ve read yet talks about specifics. Mentioned in the article; they've been removing references to Mastodon from Mastodon. Which you are allowed to do, but at that point you have to release any changes you've made.

Unsure if it's the incompetence of the the cover up or the actual violation that's more bothersome for me.

by ctvo 5y ago

Unsure if it's the incompetence of the the cover up or the actual violation that's more bothersome for me.

>the incompetence i mean let's be real who is ever going to work for this thing, the amount of qualified engineers who are going to sign up for Trump's Mastodon media clone you can probably count on one hand. Which might arguably be the biggest problem all of these companies are going to have, how are these people ever going to find actual developers

dymk 5y ago
I guarantee you there are plenty of smart, capable, clever engineers willing (and likely motivated by sincerer personal belief) to work on Trump's Mastodon media clone. I'm not one of them, but I also put active effort into not letting my social spheres from taint my view of "the other"'s ability too much.
- hairofadog 5y ago
  I'm certain you're right that there are a lot of talented engineers with political philosophies all over the spectrum, many of whom I would whole-heartedly disagree with. However, Trump and the folks in his immediate circle seem to drive away competence through a special combination of malice, selfishness, pettiness, projection, and short-sightedness that boggles the mind. Set aside ideology for a minute; it seems like not paying the bills is standard procedure for their organization, and I don't know who would stand for it regardless of their ideology.
  - darksaints 5y ago
    There are very few of Trump's allies that would ever work for him, either as an employee or a contractor. They can see his modus operandi clear as day. And yet somehow there are always suckers that he can convince to do his shit for free. Of course there is a promise of payment, but the check never arrives.
  - dymk 5y ago
    Absolutely, the Truth platform will likely fail due to inept management, legal troubles, learning that moderation is actually a hard problem, etc. I just want GGP to know that there are plenty of smart people willing to work on such a project (assuming they get paid) - and I want to combat this idea that the "other side" is just a bunch of bumbling bozos who don't know the difference between a bit and a byte. There's likely also a small number of people who would work on this just because they believe in Trump's ideology, and would like to see Truth exist more than they'd like to get paid on a regular basis.
tlear 5y ago
There is a massive pool of engineers that if payed FAANG*1.1 salary would work on anything. As long as they set salaries correctly they will not have any issues recruiting talent. You also seriously underestimate number of people pissed off about having spout the latest woke tropes to continue being employed at FAANG, those will go for much lower rate.
dylan604 5y ago
What? Half of the country voted for this guy. That's a pretty large pool of people to pull from for future employees.
- greggturkington 5y ago
  Only ~60% of eligible US voters voted in 2016 and 2020, Trump lost the popular vote both times, "half of the country" did not vote for him.
  - dylan604 5y ago
    74+ million did which worked out to 46.9%. That's pretty close to 50% for discussion purposes. That's a large pool of potential employees.
    - qkqk 5y ago
      That's about 22.5% of the country, not half.
      - dylan604 5y ago
        Might I interest you in a course on statistics and how smaller samplings can be used to extrapolate larger sets?
        KittenInABox 5y ago
        Then the correct statement would be "half the country would've voted for this guy, based on the number of people who did vote".
    - dragonwriter 5y ago
      > 74+ million did which worked out to 46.9%. Not of the country it didn't.
- rsynnott 5y ago
  I'm not sure half of them would want to _work_ for him, though. He doesn't exactly have a stellar reputation as an employer.
ctvo 5y ago
It feels like they outsourced this, or hired the people willing to do the work most cheaply. More likely they hired the people in their network who had any experience in this space and hoped for the best (Bill was director of engineering for a regional bank? He knows people, right?). I don't doubt there would be engineers willing to work on this if 1) the pay was right 2) the culture was right. Do they have the executives in place who know how to set those two things to attract the best engineers? All signs point to no.

randombits0 5y ago

Could you point to the violation please? I don’t see how users would be entitled to their modified software if they do not distribute it. Using the software is not distribution. Or is it?

rsynnott 5y ago
That would be the case if it was under boring ol' normal GPLv3. However, it is not; it's under the AGPL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affero_General_Public_License https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affero_General_Public_License If they've changed it at all, they'll need to release that.
- randombits0 5y ago
  So if my users are my customers or employees, this license would make the product unusable. Maybe. Where’s the line? The product provides my content, in the form of html/css/JavaScript/whatever. That’s technically software/copyrightable but isn’t a component of the AGPLed product. Otherwise, I agree that the AGPL would require distribution of software mods to the product. I can’t imagine why they would modify or how the author would detect such modifications. Sorry, but I’m still having trouble understanding just what modifications are being discussed. Nothing I’ve read yet talks about specifics. There should at least be a smoking gun, no? Otherwise, post a link to the product and you’re done.
  - rsynnott 5y ago
    > So if my users are my customers or employees, this license would make the product unusable. No, not at all; you'd simply have to release the changes you make. For the purposes of this article, your 'users' are anyone who interacts with the software. > Sorry, but I’m still having trouble understanding just what modifications are being discussed. Nothing I’ve read yet talks about specifics. Mentioned in the article; they've been removing references to Mastodon from Mastodon. Which you are allowed to do, but at that point you have to release any changes you've made.