4 ms·

What he did was utterly unprofessional, hazardous, and outright dangerous to those who trusted and used his library. By putting it on Github, he surrendered a

What he did was utterly unprofessional, hazardous, and outright dangerous to those who trusted and used his library. By putting it on Github, he surrendered a portion of his right to distribute to Microsoft, and Microsoft did the best course of action to protect their reputation and the interest of their stakeholders. I see nothing wrong with this.

runarberg 5y ago
There is a little bit of dissonance here. Microsoft, a multi billion dollar company who works with organizations such as ICE which routinely engages in human right abuses and causes sever suffering and harm to thousands of people who are already pretty vulnerable. vs. an open source developer who’s work benefits companies like Microsoft who have no obligation to pay for that labor. And engages in a single industrial sabotage which causes minor disruptions, and harm which at most costs other developer some time and temporary frustrations. I feel like we need some sense of relativity when we attribute nouns such as hazardous and dangerous here. Especially when we are talking about Microsoft.
npn 5y ago
> professional then pay him? I'd admit that this person didn't really contribute anything really worthy. But please do not require someone to be "professional" when you did not pay him a dime.
- pawelmurias 5y ago
  Unprofessional as in done by a person I wouldn't hire in his current mental state.
  - npn 5y ago
    > hire him So what you do mean is someone had to spend hundreds of hours maintaining some projects you've been using and also should have perfect personality and well behaved enough before you hire him?
    - pawelmurias 5y ago
      I would prefer to avoid people who sabotage stuff and literally build bombs.
dns_snek 5y ago
How was it hazardous or "outright dangerous"? You see a build fail, you pin the previous version of that dependency, run the build again and go on with your life. Asshole move? Sure. Hazardous and dangerous? Don't be dramatic.

runarberg 5y ago

There is a little bit of dissonance here. Microsoft, a multi billion dollar company who works with organizations such as ICE which routinely engages in human right abuses and causes sever suffering and harm to thousands of people who are already pretty vulnerable. vs. an open source developer who’s work benefits companies like Microsoft who have no obligation to pay for that labor. And engages in a single industrial sabotage which causes minor disruptions, and harm which at most costs other developer some time and temporary frustrations. I feel like we need some sense of relativity when we attribute nouns such as hazardous and dangerous here. Especially when we are talking about Microsoft.

npn 5y ago

> professional then pay him? I'd admit that this person didn't really contribute anything really worthy. But please do not require someone to be "professional" when you did not pay him a dime.

pawelmurias 5y ago
Unprofessional as in done by a person I wouldn't hire in his current mental state.
- npn 5y ago
  > hire him So what you do mean is someone had to spend hundreds of hours maintaining some projects you've been using and also should have perfect personality and well behaved enough before you hire him?
  - pawelmurias 5y ago
    I would prefer to avoid people who sabotage stuff and literally build bombs.

dns_snek 5y ago

How was it hazardous or "outright dangerous"? You see a build fail, you pin the previous version of that dependency, run the build again and go on with your life. Asshole move? Sure. Hazardous and dangerous? Don't be dramatic.