9 ms·

I don't get the hate here. This is practically a public service and Deno doesn't have any direct or obvious material gains from this. Definitely not more then d

I don't get the hate here. This is practically a public service and Deno doesn't have any direct or obvious material gains from this. Definitely not more then dozens of other projects (from Chrome to Node.js to Tutorial sites and any company offering something with JS) So what if they are a VC backed company? If you perform a public service, it's fair to ask the public for money. No one is suggesting this money would go to fund their product.

op7 1y ago
They don't have the right to do this. Oracle safeguards the JavaScript trademark against abuse with it's powerful legal teams and has a track record of good stewardship. These guys want to hijack their property and let it loose to the wild west. Who knows what unethical actors will do with it..
- simonh 1y ago
  Freedom is all very well until someone decides they are free to come and take your stuff, or lie about you, or pretend to be you.
- conartist6 1y ago
  Most people just call the language "JS" cause Oracle doesn't own that trademark. That's why you wouldn't be able to have a JavascriptConf but we do have JSConf. This is a long-winded way of saying that we already know what people would do with the freedom to speak the name of the language and it's nothing worth fearmongering over... It's for the courts to determine who had what rights, but it's Oracle that is credibly accused of greatly exceeding the rights given them under the law
- suprfsat 1y ago
  For example, low effort trolling, or self-propagating supply chain attacks.
- nchmy 1y ago
  The entire point is that oracle has done nothing with the trademark - especially not being a good steward. What bizarro world are you living in?
  - nurettin 1y ago
    > oracle has done nothing with the trademark In my Bizarro world, that is a good thing. Not doing things includes: * Not monetizing * Not advertising * No agendas * No lawsuits * No enforcement (other than annoying organizations with C&D letters and then retracting them) I would like it to remain as it is.
    - davorak 1y ago
      If they are not using the trademark for anything, at least by US law, I think they do not get to keep it. The point of trademarks is to promote the production of public good, and if they are not in use they are not producing public good, but will consume public resources, like people dealing with C&D letter or the current time and effort from the government on deno's filings.
    - mmcclure 1y ago
      I agree that Oracle has been a perfectly fine trademark holder in all of these regards in that they are entirely irrelevant to JavaScript and have been for as long as I can remember. The point here is that them not doing those things would be codified. Deno's not trying to take the trademark from them for themselves, they're trying to get the USPTO to agree that JavaScript is a generic term at this point and unable to be trademarked or owned by any one entity. I'm not sure how that changes any of the bullet points you've got above. It's nice that points 4 and 5 would become completely impossible and not just improbable because the trademark owner currently doesn't care enough to do it.
r_lee 1y ago
Imagine the kind of media attention / clout they'll get for "beating Oracle" etc. They absolutely do get material gains from this, should they succeed. It'd be a much more legitimate effort if they were just asking people to raise funds for e.g. OpenJS to file suit etc.
- Sammi 1y ago
  Sure they benefit, but so do a lot of other people. Sound fair to ask everyone else to pitch in. Deno have already bankrolled this themselves for a while.
- Fraaaank 1y ago
  Litigation is not just 'file and forget'. Deno, or any other organisation, needs to contribute in time and effort for several years. In my opinion, "media attention / clout" is a fair compensation.
- nchmy 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - jamesnorden 1y ago
    The parent poster is just countering the argument that Deno gains nothing from this, no need to strawman.
  - ToucanLoucan 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - nchmy 1y ago
      Indeed. I once had a former friend say something to the effect of "I wish there were a candidate who had a healthy balance of libertarian values and compassion". I asked him how he reconciles those to diametrically-opposed concepts and he grumbled and we're no longer friends.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
jansan 1y ago
Please do not accuse anyone of "hate" for having a different opinion and expressing it in a way that you do not like. Btw, I donated.
- Imustaskforhelp 1y ago
  The sad reality that you had to tell your stance by saying that you donated in this context otherwise people would've considered you an (anti deno?) in this lawsuit... I think our actions speak louder than words. Yes, I think we shouldn't spread hate speech and everyone has their own biases. We should all preferably write comments in good faith hoping to learn something new from the others point of view. So this was a fresh breath of view as in that I feel like this might be the best way of not literally accusing others but at the same time, I feel like that there might be some malicious actors or people not acting in completely good faith that can be indirectly supported by not accusing anyone y'know? If somebody is bringing their personal VC sucks vendetta (I hate VC but I mean I can stand behind donations if they are transparent etc.) into a discussion, its not entirely good faith and shouldn't be accused at a (somewhat?) rate. I think that the situation imo is that deno might have some good people but it would still be better if it wasn't deno suing them but rather some other preferably non profit which we could donate to that can sue it instead. Maybe (node?)
  - Forgeties79 1y ago
    > If somebody is bringing their personal VC sucks vendetta It’s very hard not to chuckle at their choice of website to express those views
- heeton 1y ago
  To be that guy: you’re objecting to someone’s subjective phrasing while also using your own subjective phrasing. Language is malleable and messy, and I find it doesn’t help discourse if you attack the surface reading of a comment. I don’t think OP is “accusing of hate”, I think they’re expressing surprise that such negative sentiments exist to a sensible issue. I agree, as do you it seems. (And yes, in writing this I asked myself if I’m reacting to your terminology or the intent behind the words. I hope it’s the latter)
MangoToupe 1y ago
The only possibly related topic that could qualify as a public service would be abolishing trademark. As it is I'd much rather get paid for having to put up with hearing about the damn language.
- morvita 1y ago
  Isn't that exactly what they're doing here? My understanding is Deno is asking the courts to invalidate Oracle's JavaScript trademark, making it a generic term in the public domain. They are not asking for the mark to be re-assigned to Deno.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - evolve2k 1y ago
    Seems a worthy community contribution on first glance. Just to check on a maybe obvious question, Deno is not trademarked is it?
    - NoahZuniga 1y ago
      Does it matter? When I say deno, you think of the software product deno, produced by deno. Just like when I say coca cola, you think of the specific drink produced by the coca cola company. What I say escalator, you don't think of that specific company's products, but of the staircase conveyor. When I say javascript, do you think of any oracle product? No! So why should users of javascript live in fear of a lawsuite from oracle?
      - evolve2k 1y ago
        Oh it very much matters. Folks are questioning the legitimacy of this endeavour. It’d be total hypocracy for them to be freeing JavaScript from Oracle and stating trademarks are bad and then to be maintaining similar themselves.
AndrewKemendo 1y ago
> So what if they are a VC backed company? If you perform a public service VCs have no public service - it’s an oxymoron. Hence the “hate” though I think cynicism is the more appropriate term The reality of finance driven organizations is that no matter what, anything that looks like public good will eventually -if not immediately- be used to capture value on behalf of capital to control
ImPostingOnHN 1y ago
> If you perform a public service, it's fair to ask the public for money. I think the order here is reversed: If you ask the public for money, it's fair to perform a public service. If you just do something you wanted to do anyways, and probably would have done anyways, then it might be viewed as less-than-charitable to ask others for money to help you achieve your goal for yourself (even if other people might benefit somewhat too). Especially when you are far richer (like 100+ times richer) than the people you're asking for money. As a volunteer organizer for a weekly meetup that helps local entrepreneurs, I and my team have never "asked the public for money". Occasionally we have private companies that like what we do and throw some money our way for coffee. It turns out that passion and effort from volunteers and attendees and other members of the startup community are the critical parts of the meetup, and money is not. So, that gets me wondering what could be done with those $200k besides pay people to get agreement on one particular word being free-er to use. For example, that would fund coffee and breakfast for the meetup for hundreds of years, perhaps even forever. Or fund plenty of other charitable causes with a direct positive impact on people.
- SilasX 1y ago
  >I think the order here is reversed: If you ask the public for money, it's fair to perform a public service. If you just do something you wanted to do anyways, and probably would have done anyways, then it might be viewed as less-than-charitable to ask others for money to help you achieve your goal for yourself (even if other people might benefit somewhat too). Especially when you are far richer (like 100+ times richer) than the people you're asking for money. I get the where you're coming from, but it's this exact attitude that ends up with critical infra like OpenSSL being maintained ad hoc by some devoted geek for a pittance, who inevitably can't keep up with critical patches.
  - ImPostingOnHN 1y ago
    If the $200k were going towards such a geek, or towards maintaining code that everyone uses, that'd be better. As it stands, the money is going to lawyers, who will argue over the right to utter the word "javascript" in a commercial context (rather than, say, "JS"). So zero coding or maintenance.
BoredPositron 1y ago
It's PR. First the petition and now this fundraiser. Sorry but it feels more like a stunt than anything sincere otherwise they would front the money. They certainly have the funds for it.
- glenstein 1y ago
  That feels like cutting off your nose to spite your face. You can be in favor insofar as it's a public service and otherwise disregard.
  - BoredPositron 1y ago
    Everyone in here jumping to the conclusion that if you say something against the PR shit deno has done. To instantly sucking off Oracle and burning JavaScript flags in the garden. They literally brought it on to themselves and now they want you to pay for it. It's "the last chance" because they made it the last chance. That should be thing discussed in here. A company abusing their reach (60k for the petition) pretending to be guarding the community (millions) while forcing it's hand and also extorting it for money.
    - azemetre 1y ago
      Yeah, it's hard for this to feel like a community endeavor when it's a single company deciding to act on behalf of the community while never taking input or building a consensus around the issue with said community. Hard to not be cynical about the whole thing, especially when it's a private VC backed company doing this and not say the OpenJS Foundation.
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
    - DonHopkins 1y ago
      >To instantly sucking off Oracle Do not anthropenisize Larry Ellison.
- 1y ago
jedisct1 1y ago
This is a form of marketing.
- ForHackernews 1y ago
  It's effective. I feel positively about anyone willing to take Oracle to court.
  - NickC25 1y ago
    I hope this is sarcasm. Larry Ellison is now the wealthiest person on earth and Oracle is an incredibly litigious rent-seeking law firm masquerading as a tech company. Good luck and godspeed to anyone with the balls to think that taking them on is a good idea.
    - bigstrat2003 1y ago
      I think you misread the comment you're replying to as "I think their chances are good", rather than "I think it speaks well of their character". The latter was how I read it, and I believe the intended meaning.
      - NickC25 1y ago
        Fair point - apologies for the confusion.
- doctorpangloss 1y ago
  It’s a little late for hockey stick growth though, no?
- Goronmon 1y ago
  This is a form of marketing. As is the existence of Hacker News.
- johnfn 1y ago
  You seem to be implying that it is bad because it is marketing, and marketing is bad. But not all forms of marketing are bad. This is a classic association fallacy[1]. In this case, Deno can both improve perception of their brand and reclaim "JavaScript" -- it's a win-win. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy
catlover76 1y ago
[dead]
1vuio0pswjnm7 1y ago
"So what if they are a VC-backed company?" Why do they need to ask for money from the public if they are VC-backed? Assuming that the Deno Land Inc. company would benefit from protection from Oracle's trademark As a member of the public I see no "material gains" from "freeing Javascript from Oracle" But I may be biased. I do not use Javascript and avoid others' use of it as best I can. I use a different object-oriented, garbage-collected scripting language with C-like syntax that is faster than JS, and faster than Lua (not LuaJIT)
- greymalik 1y ago
  Why are you being cryptic about it?
zenmac 1y ago
Yeah I feel like Deno seems still ok for a VC backed company. They are bring values to the JS dev community, and all their code is open sourced. Are there any down side to using deno instead of node now days?
- daveidol 1y ago
  If deno is supported, I prefer it to node. But unfortunately node support is still the “standard” for most platforms I’d say.
  - tylerchilds 1y ago
    When you say most platforms, what do you mean? I’m just curious since I’ve been doing deno for a few years now and haven’t missed node beyond cloning other programs.
pjmlp 1y ago
It looks more like they aren't getting the adoption that they need, so they go after theater like this, instead of giving us reasons why we should talk IT into allowing Deno in our OS images instead of Node.js. Who cares if it is JavaScript, ECMAScript, JScript, WhateverScript.
- indigodaddy 1y ago
  This is a bit of a humorous comment considering the current NPM drama.
  - pjmlp 1y ago
    That drama could happen in any ecosystem where developers shoot from the hip adding dependencies without second thought, the same that thought curl | sudo sh is a good idea to start with.
    - daveidol 1y ago
      Ryan actually had the foresight to add permission sandboxing to deno from the start though
      - pjmlp 1y ago
        Sandboxing doesn't help against malicious code that changes expected behaviours or corrupt data.
    - indigodaddy 1y ago
      True but I still chuckled:)
fatata123 1y ago
[dead]

op7 1y ago

They don't have the right to do this. Oracle safeguards the JavaScript trademark against abuse with it's powerful legal teams and has a track record of good stewardship. These guys want to hijack their property and let it loose to the wild west. Who knows what unethical actors will do with it..

simonh 1y ago
Freedom is all very well until someone decides they are free to come and take your stuff, or lie about you, or pretend to be you.
conartist6 1y ago
Most people just call the language "JS" cause Oracle doesn't own that trademark. That's why you wouldn't be able to have a JavascriptConf but we do have JSConf. This is a long-winded way of saying that we already know what people would do with the freedom to speak the name of the language and it's nothing worth fearmongering over... It's for the courts to determine who had what rights, but it's Oracle that is credibly accused of greatly exceeding the rights given them under the law
suprfsat 1y ago
For example, low effort trolling, or self-propagating supply chain attacks.
nchmy 1y ago
The entire point is that oracle has done nothing with the trademark - especially not being a good steward. What bizarro world are you living in?
- nurettin 1y ago
  > oracle has done nothing with the trademark In my Bizarro world, that is a good thing. Not doing things includes: * Not monetizing * Not advertising * No agendas * No lawsuits * No enforcement (other than annoying organizations with C&D letters and then retracting them) I would like it to remain as it is.
  - davorak 1y ago
    If they are not using the trademark for anything, at least by US law, I think they do not get to keep it. The point of trademarks is to promote the production of public good, and if they are not in use they are not producing public good, but will consume public resources, like people dealing with C&D letter or the current time and effort from the government on deno's filings.
  - mmcclure 1y ago
    I agree that Oracle has been a perfectly fine trademark holder in all of these regards in that they are entirely irrelevant to JavaScript and have been for as long as I can remember. The point here is that them not doing those things would be codified. Deno's not trying to take the trademark from them for themselves, they're trying to get the USPTO to agree that JavaScript is a generic term at this point and unable to be trademarked or owned by any one entity. I'm not sure how that changes any of the bullet points you've got above. It's nice that points 4 and 5 would become completely impossible and not just improbable because the trademark owner currently doesn't care enough to do it.

r_lee 1y ago

Imagine the kind of media attention / clout they'll get for "beating Oracle" etc. They absolutely do get material gains from this, should they succeed. It'd be a much more legitimate effort if they were just asking people to raise funds for e.g. OpenJS to file suit etc.

Sammi 1y ago
Sure they benefit, but so do a lot of other people. Sound fair to ask everyone else to pitch in. Deno have already bankrolled this themselves for a while.
Fraaaank 1y ago
Litigation is not just 'file and forget'. Deno, or any other organisation, needs to contribute in time and effort for several years. In my opinion, "media attention / clout" is a fair compensation.
nchmy 1y ago
[flagged]
- jamesnorden 1y ago
  The parent poster is just countering the argument that Deno gains nothing from this, no need to strawman.
- ToucanLoucan 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - nchmy 1y ago
    Indeed. I once had a former friend say something to the effect of "I wish there were a candidate who had a healthy balance of libertarian values and compassion". I asked him how he reconciles those to diametrically-opposed concepts and he grumbled and we're no longer friends.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

jansan 1y ago

Please do not accuse anyone of "hate" for having a different opinion and expressing it in a way that you do not like. Btw, I donated.

Imustaskforhelp 1y ago
The sad reality that you had to tell your stance by saying that you donated in this context otherwise people would've considered you an (anti deno?) in this lawsuit... I think our actions speak louder than words. Yes, I think we shouldn't spread hate speech and everyone has their own biases. We should all preferably write comments in good faith hoping to learn something new from the others point of view. So this was a fresh breath of view as in that I feel like this might be the best way of not literally accusing others but at the same time, I feel like that there might be some malicious actors or people not acting in completely good faith that can be indirectly supported by not accusing anyone y'know? If somebody is bringing their personal VC sucks vendetta (I hate VC but I mean I can stand behind donations if they are transparent etc.) into a discussion, its not entirely good faith and shouldn't be accused at a (somewhat?) rate. I think that the situation imo is that deno might have some good people but it would still be better if it wasn't deno suing them but rather some other preferably non profit which we could donate to that can sue it instead. Maybe (node?)
- Forgeties79 1y ago
  > If somebody is bringing their personal VC sucks vendetta It’s very hard not to chuckle at their choice of website to express those views
heeton 1y ago
To be that guy: you’re objecting to someone’s subjective phrasing while also using your own subjective phrasing. Language is malleable and messy, and I find it doesn’t help discourse if you attack the surface reading of a comment. I don’t think OP is “accusing of hate”, I think they’re expressing surprise that such negative sentiments exist to a sensible issue. I agree, as do you it seems. (And yes, in writing this I asked myself if I’m reacting to your terminology or the intent behind the words. I hope it’s the latter)

MangoToupe 1y ago

The only possibly related topic that could qualify as a public service would be abolishing trademark. As it is I'd much rather get paid for having to put up with hearing about the damn language.

morvita 1y ago
Isn't that exactly what they're doing here? My understanding is Deno is asking the courts to invalidate Oracle's JavaScript trademark, making it a generic term in the public domain. They are not asking for the mark to be re-assigned to Deno.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- evolve2k 1y ago
  Seems a worthy community contribution on first glance. Just to check on a maybe obvious question, Deno is not trademarked is it?
  - NoahZuniga 1y ago
    Does it matter? When I say deno, you think of the software product deno, produced by deno. Just like when I say coca cola, you think of the specific drink produced by the coca cola company. What I say escalator, you don't think of that specific company's products, but of the staircase conveyor. When I say javascript, do you think of any oracle product? No! So why should users of javascript live in fear of a lawsuite from oracle?
    - evolve2k 1y ago
      Oh it very much matters. Folks are questioning the legitimacy of this endeavour. It’d be total hypocracy for them to be freeing JavaScript from Oracle and stating trademarks are bad and then to be maintaining similar themselves.

AndrewKemendo 1y ago

> So what if they are a VC backed company? If you perform a public service VCs have no public service - it’s an oxymoron. Hence the “hate” though I think cynicism is the more appropriate term The reality of finance driven organizations is that no matter what, anything that looks like public good will eventually -if not immediately- be used to capture value on behalf of capital to control

ImPostingOnHN 1y ago

> If you perform a public service, it's fair to ask the public for money. I think the order here is reversed: If you ask the public for money, it's fair to perform a public service. If you just do something you wanted to do anyways, and probably would have done anyways, then it might be viewed as less-than-charitable to ask others for money to help you achieve your goal for yourself (even if other people might benefit somewhat too). Especially when you are far richer (like 100+ times richer) than the people you're asking for money. As a volunteer organizer for a weekly meetup that helps local entrepreneurs, I and my team have never "asked the public for money". Occasionally we have private companies that like what we do and throw some money our way for coffee. It turns out that passion and effort from volunteers and attendees and other members of the startup community are the critical parts of the meetup, and money is not. So, that gets me wondering what could be done with those $200k besides pay people to get agreement on one particular word being free-er to use. For example, that would fund coffee and breakfast for the meetup for hundreds of years, perhaps even forever. Or fund plenty of other charitable causes with a direct positive impact on people.

SilasX 1y ago
>I think the order here is reversed: If you ask the public for money, it's fair to perform a public service. If you just do something you wanted to do anyways, and probably would have done anyways, then it might be viewed as less-than-charitable to ask others for money to help you achieve your goal for yourself (even if other people might benefit somewhat too). Especially when you are far richer (like 100+ times richer) than the people you're asking for money. I get the where you're coming from, but it's this exact attitude that ends up with critical infra like OpenSSL being maintained ad hoc by some devoted geek for a pittance, who inevitably can't keep up with critical patches.
- ImPostingOnHN 1y ago
  If the $200k were going towards such a geek, or towards maintaining code that everyone uses, that'd be better. As it stands, the money is going to lawyers, who will argue over the right to utter the word "javascript" in a commercial context (rather than, say, "JS"). So zero coding or maintenance.

BoredPositron 1y ago

It's PR. First the petition and now this fundraiser. Sorry but it feels more like a stunt than anything sincere otherwise they would front the money. They certainly have the funds for it.

glenstein 1y ago
That feels like cutting off your nose to spite your face. You can be in favor insofar as it's a public service and otherwise disregard.
- BoredPositron 1y ago
  Everyone in here jumping to the conclusion that if you say something against the PR shit deno has done. To instantly sucking off Oracle and burning JavaScript flags in the garden. They literally brought it on to themselves and now they want you to pay for it. It's "the last chance" because they made it the last chance. That should be thing discussed in here. A company abusing their reach (60k for the petition) pretending to be guarding the community (millions) while forcing it's hand and also extorting it for money.
  - azemetre 1y ago
    Yeah, it's hard for this to feel like a community endeavor when it's a single company deciding to act on behalf of the community while never taking input or building a consensus around the issue with said community. Hard to not be cynical about the whole thing, especially when it's a private VC backed company doing this and not say the OpenJS Foundation.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
  - DonHopkins 1y ago
    >To instantly sucking off Oracle Do not anthropenisize Larry Ellison.
1y ago

jedisct1 1y ago

This is a form of marketing.

ForHackernews 1y ago
It's effective. I feel positively about anyone willing to take Oracle to court.
- NickC25 1y ago
  I hope this is sarcasm. Larry Ellison is now the wealthiest person on earth and Oracle is an incredibly litigious rent-seeking law firm masquerading as a tech company. Good luck and godspeed to anyone with the balls to think that taking them on is a good idea.
  - bigstrat2003 1y ago
    I think you misread the comment you're replying to as "I think their chances are good", rather than "I think it speaks well of their character". The latter was how I read it, and I believe the intended meaning.
    - NickC25 1y ago
      Fair point - apologies for the confusion.
doctorpangloss 1y ago
It’s a little late for hockey stick growth though, no?
Goronmon 1y ago
This is a form of marketing. As is the existence of Hacker News.
johnfn 1y ago
You seem to be implying that it is bad because it is marketing, and marketing is bad. But not all forms of marketing are bad. This is a classic association fallacy[1]. In this case, Deno can both improve perception of their brand and reclaim "JavaScript" -- it's a win-win. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

catlover76 1y ago

[dead]

1vuio0pswjnm7 1y ago

"So what if they are a VC-backed company?" Why do they need to ask for money from the public if they are VC-backed? Assuming that the Deno Land Inc. company would benefit from protection from Oracle's trademark As a member of the public I see no "material gains" from "freeing Javascript from Oracle" But I may be biased. I do not use Javascript and avoid others' use of it as best I can. I use a different object-oriented, garbage-collected scripting language with C-like syntax that is faster than JS, and faster than Lua (not LuaJIT)

greymalik 1y ago
Why are you being cryptic about it?

zenmac 1y ago

Yeah I feel like Deno seems still ok for a VC backed company. They are bring values to the JS dev community, and all their code is open sourced. Are there any down side to using deno instead of node now days?

daveidol 1y ago
If deno is supported, I prefer it to node. But unfortunately node support is still the “standard” for most platforms I’d say.
- tylerchilds 1y ago
  When you say most platforms, what do you mean? I’m just curious since I’ve been doing deno for a few years now and haven’t missed node beyond cloning other programs.

pjmlp 1y ago

It looks more like they aren't getting the adoption that they need, so they go after theater like this, instead of giving us reasons why we should talk IT into allowing Deno in our OS images instead of Node.js. Who cares if it is JavaScript, ECMAScript, JScript, WhateverScript.

indigodaddy 1y ago
This is a bit of a humorous comment considering the current NPM drama.
- pjmlp 1y ago
  That drama could happen in any ecosystem where developers shoot from the hip adding dependencies without second thought, the same that thought curl | sudo sh is a good idea to start with.
  - daveidol 1y ago
    Ryan actually had the foresight to add permission sandboxing to deno from the start though
    - pjmlp 1y ago
      Sandboxing doesn't help against malicious code that changes expected behaviours or corrupt data.
  - indigodaddy 1y ago
    True but I still chuckled:)

fatata123 1y ago

[dead]