6 ms·

I don't think Github belongs on that list.

by Udo 13y ago

cscurmudgeon 13y ago
Last I checked Github itself is neither open source nor free.
- Udo 13y ago
  It's a service designed around a free and open protocol, the other examples are binary software packages. You can use any local git repository as a drop-in replacement. Github is neither a dependency nor a walled garden for most people, but the other software on that list definitely is. Git is the tool people use, Github is just a public repository. There is no question that Github is itself closed source, but it doesn't really share key attributes with the other examples mentioned either.
  - zanny 13y ago
    People are getting very dependent on Github workflows beyond just the act of being a git repository. If all you need is a remote git repo, use gitorious, it is open source. No, people use github for the social features, the wiki, the issue tracker, comments, etc. These features are not portable, and as a result if github went down, your entire workflow suffers.
    - Karunamon 13y ago
      Every single bit of which can be replaced with Gitlab, and in some cases, Gitlab has more and better features.
  - jm3 13y ago
    His point was that people could use bare git without github, but many use Github, which isn't free according to three of the four freedoms RMS lists in the essay [1], no matter how much we hackers might love it. Lots of people love Excel, too, but that doesn't make it free software. [1] Github: (0) freedom to run the program as you wish - YUP (1) freedom to study & change the source - NOPE (2) freedom to make and distribute exact copies - NOT SO MUCH (3) freedom to make and distribute copies of your modified versions - NO
    - dinkumthinkum 13y ago
      Sure, and I can eat Ramen noodles instead prime rib but I don't see how that's relevant. Github provides a service: hosting, a "community," etc. This isn't the same kind tyranny as presumably binary distributed software. Right? That should be obvious, unless I am losing my mind.
      - dllthomas 13y ago
        In what respect do you have more control with a service than with a binary?
      - rcxdude 13y ago
        It's actually worse: you don't heave the freedom to use old versions when they push out an update, and you may lose access to it completely for any number of reasons, including 'we don't like you'. Granted, part of this lack of freedom is fair due to hosted services being different from just plain software, but the power over the users are there nonetheless.
        dinkumthinkum 13y ago
        Again, and I mean this in a nice way, how are your complaints remotely relevant? I'm really trying to understand...? So if someone builds me a house and I pay them ... Is it immoral for them to have built the house without being some kind indentured servant to me for the rest of their lives doing whatever I want for whatever reason ... That seems like a weird thing to say, but what you're saying is just as silly. Should I have access to unlimited resources from this builder and if they do not consent to my demands then they tyrants? It's a service that I pay for and I have agreed to conditions of said service and I can choose to stop paying if I am not happy or I can sue if I feel the terms have not been met. I don't see the problem but I do see clearly the alternative is charity. Someone else responded, a user jszz on this thread and said something crazy about Germany and how we need become a self-sufficient commune. I'm not sure what it meant and I'm not sure that anyone that holds this view knows what they mean. =(
        13y ago
  - roel_v 13y ago
    Ah yes, the 'I like these people's marketing, they must be good' method of lulling one's cognitive dissonance to sleep.
- dinkumthinkum 13y ago
  Isn't it weird to refer to Github or any other company providing a service as "not open source" or "not free" in a libre software sense? What is the alternative for you all? Charity? I'm being serious.
  - jjsz 13y ago
    The alternative is for the whole US to strive for actually being the alternative; the self sufficient decentralized yet United States. If Germany, Singapore, China and Japan provided alternatives, while we continue to hold on to old ways, like: not investing as much into energy efficiency, or thinking outside the box like Germany -> we will lose to white labeled and foreign hosted OSS. To solve this we would need a social market economy [0] or at least a mandate to tax for fractionally financed civic OSS, open hardware (self sufficient micro servers), data, and R&D. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_market_economy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_market_economy
    - dinkumthinkum 13y ago
      I'm really struggling to understand what this means ... It doesn't makes sense. Can you help? This thing you are talking about United States and this and that ... It is some kind of alternative to Github or hosted services? I don't know if it makes sense ... Oh wait how would these governments get money to support all charity?
      - jjsz 13y ago
        I knew I went too off topic...What I mean by Singapore is the mandated efficient renewable buildings, Germany: it's social market economy and how they are paying people for energy, China: it's investment in renewable energy, Japan: the same. The alternative of a centralized structure is a decentralized or hybrid one. The equipment for what I suggested in other terms would have to be treated as a public good, taxed by the services it provides or as a government subsidized one. Which as an efficient microserver: communication, entertainment, and the option to subscribe to private services. The ideology here is getting the most people to use a box by paying for them to maintain it. The box just happens to be energy efficient to the point where one can exchange selling their excess electricity or storage for private services / nodes / other microservers. Another form of continuing this route is to be able to use energy, storage, or cpu / gpu as a currency or collateral. Also if one decides to give up control of their servers for hosting, or scientific research one can. It's this idea we're trying to evangelize at r/Nucleus. I believe freeing software will eventually free the regulation on transactions, energy, and communications. Something like a government subsidized team that controls a vagrant-mesos-docker for connecting CJDNS nodes (the SaaSS). Time Warner cable and all of these other companies who don't run OSS are stopping the digital divide and prohibiting peer communications. WebRTC and websockets are enough! The topic should be on why BSD software is more important right now than GPL. Since we're talking about freedom.
- mikelat 13y ago
  It's a service, doesn't really fall into the same category as software you install on your machine (which you trust). You have no reason to trust their servers, but ultimately you're not giving them control over your hardware anyway.
Myrmornis 13y ago
I love github, but as it is not open source there's no point pretending it doesn't share some of the frustrations that closed-source software bring. Out of all the software I use day-to-day it is the only one that regularly has me thinking "I wish I could change this, or look for an issue or PR discussing changing it". I want mathjax support!

I don't think Github belongs on that list.

by Udo 13y ago

I don't think Github belongs on that list.

cscurmudgeon 13y ago

Last I checked Github itself is neither open source nor free.

Udo 13y ago
It's a service designed around a free and open protocol, the other examples are binary software packages. You can use any local git repository as a drop-in replacement. Github is neither a dependency nor a walled garden for most people, but the other software on that list definitely is. Git is the tool people use, Github is just a public repository. There is no question that Github is itself closed source, but it doesn't really share key attributes with the other examples mentioned either.
- zanny 13y ago
  People are getting very dependent on Github workflows beyond just the act of being a git repository. If all you need is a remote git repo, use gitorious, it is open source. No, people use github for the social features, the wiki, the issue tracker, comments, etc. These features are not portable, and as a result if github went down, your entire workflow suffers.
  - Karunamon 13y ago
    Every single bit of which can be replaced with Gitlab, and in some cases, Gitlab has more and better features.
- jm3 13y ago
  His point was that people could use bare git without github, but many use Github, which isn't free according to three of the four freedoms RMS lists in the essay [1], no matter how much we hackers might love it. Lots of people love Excel, too, but that doesn't make it free software. [1] Github: (0) freedom to run the program as you wish - YUP (1) freedom to study & change the source - NOPE (2) freedom to make and distribute exact copies - NOT SO MUCH (3) freedom to make and distribute copies of your modified versions - NO
  - dinkumthinkum 13y ago
    Sure, and I can eat Ramen noodles instead prime rib but I don't see how that's relevant. Github provides a service: hosting, a "community," etc. This isn't the same kind tyranny as presumably binary distributed software. Right? That should be obvious, unless I am losing my mind.
    - dllthomas 13y ago
      In what respect do you have more control with a service than with a binary?
    - rcxdude 13y ago
      It's actually worse: you don't heave the freedom to use old versions when they push out an update, and you may lose access to it completely for any number of reasons, including 'we don't like you'. Granted, part of this lack of freedom is fair due to hosted services being different from just plain software, but the power over the users are there nonetheless.
      - dinkumthinkum 13y ago
        Again, and I mean this in a nice way, how are your complaints remotely relevant? I'm really trying to understand...? So if someone builds me a house and I pay them ... Is it immoral for them to have built the house without being some kind indentured servant to me for the rest of their lives doing whatever I want for whatever reason ... That seems like a weird thing to say, but what you're saying is just as silly. Should I have access to unlimited resources from this builder and if they do not consent to my demands then they tyrants? It's a service that I pay for and I have agreed to conditions of said service and I can choose to stop paying if I am not happy or I can sue if I feel the terms have not been met. I don't see the problem but I do see clearly the alternative is charity. Someone else responded, a user jszz on this thread and said something crazy about Germany and how we need become a self-sufficient commune. I'm not sure what it meant and I'm not sure that anyone that holds this view knows what they mean. =(
        13y ago
- roel_v 13y ago
  Ah yes, the 'I like these people's marketing, they must be good' method of lulling one's cognitive dissonance to sleep.
dinkumthinkum 13y ago
Isn't it weird to refer to Github or any other company providing a service as "not open source" or "not free" in a libre software sense? What is the alternative for you all? Charity? I'm being serious.
- jjsz 13y ago
  The alternative is for the whole US to strive for actually being the alternative; the self sufficient decentralized yet United States. If Germany, Singapore, China and Japan provided alternatives, while we continue to hold on to old ways, like: not investing as much into energy efficiency, or thinking outside the box like Germany -> we will lose to white labeled and foreign hosted OSS. To solve this we would need a social market economy [0] or at least a mandate to tax for fractionally financed civic OSS, open hardware (self sufficient micro servers), data, and R&D. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_market_economy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_market_economy
  - dinkumthinkum 13y ago
    I'm really struggling to understand what this means ... It doesn't makes sense. Can you help? This thing you are talking about United States and this and that ... It is some kind of alternative to Github or hosted services? I don't know if it makes sense ... Oh wait how would these governments get money to support all charity?
    - jjsz 13y ago
      I knew I went too off topic...What I mean by Singapore is the mandated efficient renewable buildings, Germany: it's social market economy and how they are paying people for energy, China: it's investment in renewable energy, Japan: the same. The alternative of a centralized structure is a decentralized or hybrid one. The equipment for what I suggested in other terms would have to be treated as a public good, taxed by the services it provides or as a government subsidized one. Which as an efficient microserver: communication, entertainment, and the option to subscribe to private services. The ideology here is getting the most people to use a box by paying for them to maintain it. The box just happens to be energy efficient to the point where one can exchange selling their excess electricity or storage for private services / nodes / other microservers. Another form of continuing this route is to be able to use energy, storage, or cpu / gpu as a currency or collateral. Also if one decides to give up control of their servers for hosting, or scientific research one can. It's this idea we're trying to evangelize at r/Nucleus. I believe freeing software will eventually free the regulation on transactions, energy, and communications. Something like a government subsidized team that controls a vagrant-mesos-docker for connecting CJDNS nodes (the SaaSS). Time Warner cable and all of these other companies who don't run OSS are stopping the digital divide and prohibiting peer communications. WebRTC and websockets are enough! The topic should be on why BSD software is more important right now than GPL. Since we're talking about freedom.
mikelat 13y ago
It's a service, doesn't really fall into the same category as software you install on your machine (which you trust). You have no reason to trust their servers, but ultimately you're not giving them control over your hardware anyway.

Myrmornis 13y ago

I love github, but as it is not open source there's no point pretending it doesn't share some of the frustrations that closed-source software bring. Out of all the software I use day-to-day it is the only one that regularly has me thinking "I wish I could change this, or look for an issue or PR discussing changing it". I want mathjax support!