5 ms·

I’ve heard people say that before. They would love to use it if there wasn’t a playful animated character. The code is open source, so I can’t imagine making a

I’ve heard people say that before. They would love to use it if there wasn’t a playful animated character. The code is open source, so I can’t imagine making a fork to remove that is a Herculean effort.

unsnap_biceps 1y ago
When I last looked into it, they are planning a white label service to customize the look and has been requesting folks to not fork and modify the images. > Regardless, Xe did ask nicely to not change out the images shipped as a whitelabel service is planned in the future https://github.com/TecharoHQ/anubis/pull/204#issuecomment-2776558289 https://github.com/TecharoHQ/anubis/pull/204#issuecomment-27...
- natebc 1y ago
  It's also mentioned on the docs site: https://anubis.techaro.lol/docs/funding/ https://anubis.techaro.lol/docs/funding/
- LPisGood 1y ago
  That’s the beautiful thing about open source, they ask but do not demand. Of course, if you use this service for your enterprise, the Right Thing To Do would be support the excellent project financially, but this is by no means required. If you want to use this project on your site and don’t like the logo, you are free to change it. If the site is personal and this project is not something you would spend money on, I don’t even think it is unethical to change the image.
  - altairprime 1y ago
    Seems pretty unethical to me. Exercising a liberty in direct contradiction to its creator’s wishes for personal gain with no recompense to them is about as crassly selfish and non-prosocial as it gets. Perhaps your ethics don’t include “being prosocial towards those whose work benefits you”? That’s the usual difference I encounter between my ethics and those who disagree that it’s crass — and I do respect such differing beliefs. Note that I’m not faulting you for behaving this way, no insult or disparagement intended, etc.! Open source inherited this dissonance between giving it all away to anyone who asks for free, and giving nothing of yours back in return because prosocial is not an ethical standard, from its predecessor belief system. It remains unsolved decades later, in both open source and libertarianism, and I certainly don’t hold generic exploiters of the prosocial-imbalance defect accountable for the underlying flaw in both belief systems.
    - jillyboel 1y ago
      The license explicitly allows you to make such changes. They could have picked a different license, but didn't. > Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the “Software”), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software
      - altairprime 1y ago
        > They could have picked a different license, but didn’t. I disagree. Licenses that prohibit exploitation of source code for personal reward are treated with hostility, shame, and boycotts — claiming that to restrict in any way the liberty of another person to exploit one’s work is unethical. Human beings are social creatures, and most human beings are not asocial with decoupled ethical systems like myself; so, given the social pressures in play, few human beings truly have the liberty to pick another license and endure the shame and vitriol that exercising that freedom earns from us.
        lytedev 1y ago
        I don't think its fully correct that social pressure means that permissive licenses are no longer meaningful when it comes to the ethics or sociology of open source software. Since the original subject is also about swapping out the imagery, it's also difficult to take your argument too seriously as the term "exploit" is doing a lot of heavy lifting for your argument. I will also add that the social and ethical component goes both ways: is it ethical to knowingly give something away freely and without restriction and then immediately attempt to impose restrictions through a purely social mechanism? I would say so as long as your expectation is that some might politely decline. Or worse, some may respond with the same vitriol and then we're at your original point, which doesn't seem to be preventing such an approach here, making me doubt your hypothesis.
        fc417fc802 1y ago
        > Licenses that prohibit exploitation of source code for personal reward are treated with hostility, shame, and boycotts I'd have to disagree. However let's just run with it because your subsequent reasoning doesn't seem consistent to me. If you do A you'll be met with hostility. So instead you do B, but then you add a request "actually please abide by A" and somehow this is supposed to not be met with hostility? You can't have it both ways. B but with an addendum that makes it A is just A wearing a mask. Changing the name doesn't change the thing.
- xena 1y ago
  I've soft launched the commercial offering and I'm working on expanding the commercial features before I announce it more publicly. If you pay $50 a month on GitHub sponsors, you get access to BotStopper complete with custom CSS support. You'll also get access to the reputation database I'm working on named hivemind.
  - ketzo 1y ago
    > reputation database I'm working on named hivemind. Anywhere I can read more about this? Sounds super interesting, and a cursory search didn’t show anything for it on your site. Otherwise I’m sure I’ll hear about it soon anyway, at the rate Anubis is going!
    - xena 1y ago
      I'd be happy to talk about it if it existed, I'm still working out the details. But the basic idea is to take advantage of the fact that Anubis is a very popular project from what I've seen with logs that server admin have submitted the same IP blocks and the like hit instances of Anubis so some kind of IP reputation thing would work for this. I am also working on some noJS checks, but I want to test them with paid customers in order to let a thousand flowers bloom.
      - ketzo 1y ago
        Cool. Good luck on both that and Anubis generally — seems like you’ve found something that’s both a meaningful benefit to the common good AND could maybe make a buncha money, or at least enough to pay for development, which is awesome.
        xena 1y ago
        Thanks! There's a lot of really hard problems to solve and most of them hinge around trust. I usually default into solving trust by making things open, but security software needs a bit of cloak and dagger by necessity. I'll find a balance I'm sure, but it's an annoying thing to balance.

unsnap_biceps 1y ago

When I last looked into it, they are planning a white label service to customize the look and has been requesting folks to not fork and modify the images. > Regardless, Xe did ask nicely to not change out the images shipped as a whitelabel service is planned in the future https://github.com/TecharoHQ/anubis/pull/204#issuecomment-2776558289 https://github.com/TecharoHQ/anubis/pull/204#issuecomment-27...

natebc 1y ago
It's also mentioned on the docs site: https://anubis.techaro.lol/docs/funding/ https://anubis.techaro.lol/docs/funding/
LPisGood 1y ago
That’s the beautiful thing about open source, they ask but do not demand. Of course, if you use this service for your enterprise, the Right Thing To Do would be support the excellent project financially, but this is by no means required. If you want to use this project on your site and don’t like the logo, you are free to change it. If the site is personal and this project is not something you would spend money on, I don’t even think it is unethical to change the image.
- altairprime 1y ago
  Seems pretty unethical to me. Exercising a liberty in direct contradiction to its creator’s wishes for personal gain with no recompense to them is about as crassly selfish and non-prosocial as it gets. Perhaps your ethics don’t include “being prosocial towards those whose work benefits you”? That’s the usual difference I encounter between my ethics and those who disagree that it’s crass — and I do respect such differing beliefs. Note that I’m not faulting you for behaving this way, no insult or disparagement intended, etc.! Open source inherited this dissonance between giving it all away to anyone who asks for free, and giving nothing of yours back in return because prosocial is not an ethical standard, from its predecessor belief system. It remains unsolved decades later, in both open source and libertarianism, and I certainly don’t hold generic exploiters of the prosocial-imbalance defect accountable for the underlying flaw in both belief systems.
  - jillyboel 1y ago
    The license explicitly allows you to make such changes. They could have picked a different license, but didn't. > Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the “Software”), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software
    - altairprime 1y ago
      > They could have picked a different license, but didn’t. I disagree. Licenses that prohibit exploitation of source code for personal reward are treated with hostility, shame, and boycotts — claiming that to restrict in any way the liberty of another person to exploit one’s work is unethical. Human beings are social creatures, and most human beings are not asocial with decoupled ethical systems like myself; so, given the social pressures in play, few human beings truly have the liberty to pick another license and endure the shame and vitriol that exercising that freedom earns from us.
      - lytedev 1y ago
        I don't think its fully correct that social pressure means that permissive licenses are no longer meaningful when it comes to the ethics or sociology of open source software. Since the original subject is also about swapping out the imagery, it's also difficult to take your argument too seriously as the term "exploit" is doing a lot of heavy lifting for your argument. I will also add that the social and ethical component goes both ways: is it ethical to knowingly give something away freely and without restriction and then immediately attempt to impose restrictions through a purely social mechanism? I would say so as long as your expectation is that some might politely decline. Or worse, some may respond with the same vitriol and then we're at your original point, which doesn't seem to be preventing such an approach here, making me doubt your hypothesis.
      - fc417fc802 1y ago
        > Licenses that prohibit exploitation of source code for personal reward are treated with hostility, shame, and boycotts I'd have to disagree. However let's just run with it because your subsequent reasoning doesn't seem consistent to me. If you do A you'll be met with hostility. So instead you do B, but then you add a request "actually please abide by A" and somehow this is supposed to not be met with hostility? You can't have it both ways. B but with an addendum that makes it A is just A wearing a mask. Changing the name doesn't change the thing.
xena 1y ago
I've soft launched the commercial offering and I'm working on expanding the commercial features before I announce it more publicly. If you pay $50 a month on GitHub sponsors, you get access to BotStopper complete with custom CSS support. You'll also get access to the reputation database I'm working on named hivemind.
- ketzo 1y ago
  > reputation database I'm working on named hivemind. Anywhere I can read more about this? Sounds super interesting, and a cursory search didn’t show anything for it on your site. Otherwise I’m sure I’ll hear about it soon anyway, at the rate Anubis is going!
  - xena 1y ago
    I'd be happy to talk about it if it existed, I'm still working out the details. But the basic idea is to take advantage of the fact that Anubis is a very popular project from what I've seen with logs that server admin have submitted the same IP blocks and the like hit instances of Anubis so some kind of IP reputation thing would work for this. I am also working on some noJS checks, but I want to test them with paid customers in order to let a thousand flowers bloom.
    - ketzo 1y ago
      Cool. Good luck on both that and Anubis generally — seems like you’ve found something that’s both a meaningful benefit to the common good AND could maybe make a buncha money, or at least enough to pay for development, which is awesome.
      - xena 1y ago
        Thanks! There's a lot of really hard problems to solve and most of them hinge around trust. I usually default into solving trust by making things open, but security software needs a bit of cloak and dagger by necessity. I'll find a balance I'm sure, but it's an annoying thing to balance.