i think the hate comes from them squandering a position of their magnitude, built upon the investment and trust of the open source ecosystem. github set a prec

i think the hate comes from them squandering a position of their magnitude, built upon the investment and trust of the open source ecosystem. github set a precedent with free public repos, but they traded the cost of supporting that for being the canonical way to store source code online (or as close to it as one company can get). docker accesses this privilege but then demands that open source people, who are by definition not paid for their work directly, must pay to host images on their branded platform, the one which guarantees them a place in the technology hall of fame. the double-punch of that failed remunerative trade ends up feeling to that community like a betrayal; not to mention the self-defeating strategy it embodies, since a technical solution here is not only possible, but would be expected from a company granted that position and privilege in the software supply chain (technical aptitude / excellence). at worst it is a betrayal, at best it comes across as lazy, because they are not reaching for a technical solution which can satisfy every constraint; they are satisfied launching one that merely satisfies their own needs, to the detriment of the community that supported them.