jfrunyon

83 ms·

871.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
How much actual reputational damage could they have possibly endured? I haven't noticed any fewer people using Zoom. It's a consent order. They're willingly agreeing to it in order to avoid other costs (like fines and a lengt
872.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
I don't... did you even read TFA? All the order says is that they can't lie about it again. They don't have to pay anything, they don't have to actually fulfill their prior claims, and the other parts of the agreement th
873.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
So it's okay that Zoom lied because users should have reverse engineered it to verify that what Zoom said about their own product was true?
874.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
How do you figure? I don't consider "making the product which users want" to be a bad thing.
875.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Correct. Which is also how git works. And there is a very good, very simple, reason for why both work this way: very few users sign their commits, even fewer want to/care about signing their commits, and even fewer verify those signatu
876.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
My issue is indeed with the DMCA. Which is why, throughout this entire thread, I have not said a single word against Microsoft's actions. I'm not sure why you replied to my comment.
877.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
There were a few failures I read about. It's kinda silly to argue about which specific one did him in when they all could've. But if he had been truly anonymous - if there was no way to link any one of his actions to any of his ot
878.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
> Assuming there is demand for mixing from anyone other than you And suddenly, it becomes a SPOF for those people.
879.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
> Hard currency refers to money that is issued by a nation that is seen as politically and economically stable. Hard currencies are widely accepted around the world as a form of payment for goods and services and may be preferred over th
880.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Who said anything about worthless? Gold bullion is not a hard currency. Nobody buys gold in order to spend it.
881.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
I don't either (although I certainly wish I did). I hope someone does too, though.
882.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Please let me know when you figure out what GitHub could reasonably do to make enough people sign their commits to change that default.
883.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Nobody is talking about your "personal git" (I assume you mean your personal git repository). We are talking about two software programs: git, and GitHub. Both are ABSOLUTELY used by millions of people.
884.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
> the RIAA is extremely unlikely to sue them, whether this is covered by the safe-harbor provisions of Title II or not Did you even read the comment you replied to? Anyone can sue anyone for any reason.
885.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Anyone can sue for anything.
886.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
... do you really expect a company, whose entire goal and motive is maximizing profit, to waste their profits? Because if so this conversation is not worth continuing.
887.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
... do you really expect a company, whose entire goal and motive is maximizing profit , to waste their profits? Because if so this conversation is not worth continuing.
888.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Removing pieces of it is not within GitHub's power. ytdl could most certainly remove the pieces which RIAA has a claim against and re-upload it.
889.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Except that you need to support peak demand, not average demand.
890.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
200 Gbps is 30Mbps for each resident.
891.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
BTW, they also did allege infringing material. Whether or not that material's copyright is in fact infringed upon by youtube-dl is not for GitHub to decide. (And, in my non-lawyer opinion, a US court would probably say it is, if this e
892.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
The non-commercial content on YouTube is decidedly not the content which is protected with the copy-protection which the RIAA is (presumably) alleging that youtube-dl circumvents.
893.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Especially when almost all of those people are staunchly against the anti-circumvention provisions.
894.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
The key here is that if they DIDN'T comply with it, the RIAA might sue them. Even if they were to win it (because a judge determines the takedown provisions don't cover it or for another reason), they'd be in for a costly leg
895.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
The copyright holders can be harmed by actions other than direct copyright infringement. In particular, the law recognizes DRM circumvention as a harm. Other commenters had already covered this aspect before I made my comment, so I'm u
896.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Did you mean "is perjury enforceable everywhere"? I bet the US government could get you extradited for something or other, if not, if it really wanted to. But I don't think they'd have much trouble getting you extradited
897.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
That was their argument, but I strongly doubt it would have held up had they been sued (particularly in the US). Also, a major point they raised was that they did not distribute LAME in executable form.
898.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Please let me know when you figure out how your complaint is in any way specific to GitHub, as opposed to git in general.
899.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Their UI is far better at it than the git tool itself. You have to explicitly tell git to check signatures (not to mention needing to go get people's keys and verify that they're correct, which GitHub does for you).
900.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Again, as you yourself mentioned, very, very, very few projects/people sign their commits. Even fewer actually verify them. That has nothing to do with how easy Git makes it to impersonate commits. In fact, whether you sign or not, you

More ›