Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jun 30, 2022 21:21 UTC (Thu) by bluca (subscriber, #118303)
Parent article: Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Github is bad, it's a proprietary platform! Says the SFC on Twitter which is, er, what was the word... https://twitter.com/conservancy/status/1542503499094626304

to post comments

Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jun 30, 2022 22:20 UTC (Thu) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link] (14 responses)

I'm not sure what your trying to argue here.. Would you mind stating your argument more directly?

Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jun 30, 2022 22:51 UTC (Thu) by Karellen (subscriber, #67644) [Link] (13 responses)

I think they're just trying to point out how very intelligent they are.

https://thenib.com/mister-gotcha/

Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jun 30, 2022 23:23 UTC (Thu) by scientes (guest, #83068) [Link] (1 responses)

The real issue here is that git was always suppose to work decentralized, but while git is quite easy to set up to share your repositories, that is too much for many people.

One issue is that NAT means that you need to rent a VPS, as it makes it much harder to just share from your personal computer.

Also, it is sort of a semantic web thing.

Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jul 1, 2022 12:41 UTC (Fri) by tchernobog (subscriber, #73595) [Link]

git != github, though. An ALM solution is not the same as of a VCS.

Git does not offer out of the box any issue tracking, CI pipelines, discoverability of branches and code review UI, etc. All things which are highly desirable by most software projects out there, open source or not. The fact that your code is hosted in a safe environment, it's easy to search across repositories, etc. is something many people are willing to pay for (either in money, or in liberty, as often is the case).

SFC's use of Twitter.

Posted Jul 1, 2022 13:23 UTC (Fri) by bkuhn (subscriber, #58642) [Link] (10 responses)

Karellen, I feel you could have made your point with less sarcasm, but raising the question that SFC organizationally uses Twitter is a reasonable thing to ask about. But, I would encourage in future that you perhaps frame your inquiry with some like “I do feel it as somewhat hypocritical that SFC has called for folks to give up GitHub, but they aren't calling for folks to give up Twitter — and in fact SFC is using Twitter actively!” That would be a respectful way to ask your inquiry.

Speaking as the person at SFC who's primary job (as Policy Fellow) is to analyze and consider and recommend policy of how we approach these proprietary software situations, I'll note that we now live in a difficult and complex world where it has become increasingly difficult (at least in industrialized countries) to engage with communities and pursue the normal functions of life without interacting with proprietary software. Personally (outside of my work at SFC), I refuse to use Twitter also. It was a difficult decision for SFC to continue using Twitter (which, BTW, I prefer to call Agrawaland — and I used to call Dorseyville (and I guess I'll be calling Musktown soon?) — all to note that Twitter is not a democratic platform, it is a for-profit company's property under the autocratic control of its CEO).

My colleague Karen Sandler and I gave two keynotes (at FOSDEM 2019 and 2020, respectively) about the challenges FOSS activists face in choosing when to use or refuse to use proprietary software. These are hard issues to decide. In fact, we internally talked quite a bit while planning the Give Up GitHub campaign to determine if GitHub had crossed enough lines that they are substantially worse in their behavior than other proprietary software companies. We believe they are, which is why we launched the campaign, but we understand that you may have a different opinion.

Meanwhile, I'll put it on the agenda for future blog posts that I should write explaining how SFC came to the decision to keep participating in Agrawaland — particularly after they previous regime (Dorsey's) cut off the federation features abruptly (which lead to identi.ca's demise). Thanks so much for your inquiry and this will make a useful blog post. I can't promise a timeline for it as we have a lot of writing in the pipeline, but I will look into it!

SFC's use of Twitter.

Posted Jul 1, 2022 18:08 UTC (Fri) by Karellen (subscriber, #67644) [Link] (2 responses)

But, I would encourage in future that you perhaps frame your inquiry with some like “I do feel it as somewhat hypocritical that SFC has called for folks to give up GitHub, but they aren't calling for folks to give up Twitter — and in fact SFC is using Twitter actively!” That would be a respectful way to ask your inquiry.

Um, the original inquiry was not mine? I'm a bit confused which parts of your response are directed at me, and which at bluca!

SFC's use of Twitter.

Posted Jul 1, 2022 19:24 UTC (Fri) by bkuhn (subscriber, #58642) [Link] (1 responses)

Karellen wrote:
> Um, the original inquiry was not mine? I'm a bit confused which parts of your response are directed at me, and which at bluca!

Yes, I'm so sorry for using your name, Karellen. I grabbed the wrong post. I was replying to bluca when I wrote this:

>> I feel you could have made your point with less sarcasm, but raising the question that SFC organizationally uses Twitter is a reasonable thing to ask about. But, I would encourage in future that you perhaps frame your inquiry with some like “I do feel it as somewhat hypocritical that SFC has called for folks to give up GitHub, but they aren't calling for folks to give up Twitter — and in fact SFC is using Twitter actively!” That would be a respectful way to ask your inquiry.

SFC's use of Twitter.

Posted Jul 1, 2022 22:58 UTC (Fri) by Karellen (subscriber, #67644) [Link]

I grabbed the wrong post.

Ha! No problem, I've replied to the wrong person by accident myself plenty of times in the past, on various fora.

Thanks, and keep up the great work.

SFC's use of Twitter.

Posted Jul 2, 2022 7:00 UTC (Sat) by oldtomas (guest, #72579) [Link]

Actually, what looks like a tangent seems to me to be at the very core of the subject. Bluca's somewhat snotty remark (and your answer to it) have somehow struck gold, I think :-)

You write, and very correctly

> I'll note that we now live in a difficult and complex world where it has become increasingly difficult (at least in industrialized countries) to engage with communities and pursue the normal functions of life without interacting with proprietary software.

(I'd disagree with the "industrialized" part: people in poorer countries are even more dependent on the "pay with your data" model)

Surveillance capitalism has learnt to interpose in our communications channels with other people or with the world in general, be it perception (Google glasses [1]), hospitality (AirBnB), personal relationships (Facebook), small markets (Amazon, eBay), public communications (Dorseyland -- uh -- Twitter), you name it.

They just insert themselves into the channels to strip-mine and monetize all that huge potential which was "going to waste" before. Wild west, claims, land that didn't belong to anyone: all over again, yay! (Of course, we know that society as a whole pays some price. It ain't a zero-sum game. The dead Rohingya
people, courtesy of Facebook is one particularly bitter example).
Coding is an inherently social endeavour.

As mpldr notes elsewhere in this comment section, what Github pulled off (in its pre-Microsoft phase) is to cast a social network over collaborative software development. The parallels to Facebook are chilling. That's what Microsoft shelled out ~$7B for. They are drowning in cash, sure, but this is a significant amount, even for them. They didn't this for the goodness of their hearts.

Personally, I'm far more worried by this than by the questions about license status of software snippets shovelled around by some NLP AI. Although this latter question is also quite important (and thorny) and I'm happy SFC is taking on it.

Keep up the good work!

[1] Some might interject that one's dead. This instance is, but the breed ain't

SFC's use of Twitter.

Posted Jul 3, 2022 22:39 UTC (Sun) by alfille (subscriber, #1631) [Link] (4 responses)

Perhaps I'm a little tangential here, but giving "ironic" names to someone else's product is also disrespectful (Agrawaland, Musktown, etc) and doesn't raise the level of discourse.

SFC's use of Twitter.

Posted Jul 4, 2022 4:51 UTC (Mon) by oldtomas (guest, #72579) [Link]

I think in this case it's justified: it reminds of the problematic fact that we, in societies which call themselves "democratic", are more and more outsourcing vital infrastructure to corporations whose governance is all but.

SFC's use of Twitter.

Posted Jul 4, 2022 16:03 UTC (Mon) by ttuttle (subscriber, #51118) [Link] (2 responses)

I hate this. Whether or not I care about someone disrespecting the product, it's obnoxious:

In a conversation about the merits of the product, it's lazy -- it's a way to smear the product without giving a proper explanation.

In a conversation about something else, it's rude -- it's a way to push the speaker's opinion about the product even when it's irrelevant or distracting.

SFC's use of Twitter.

Posted Jul 5, 2022 22:34 UTC (Tue) by hummassa (guest, #307) [Link]

Is it always, though? I'm not sure. If you consider it a commentary on the autocratic governance of such hypermedia giants, it's not unexplained (the reason for your annoyance #1), and neither irrelevant (annoyance #2.1) nor distracting (#2.2).

Maybe your annoyance with such discourse comes from lacking the usage of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity -- a principle that is very useful in a respectful and beneficial dialogue. "Be strict on what you produce and lax on what you consume", like Unix :-) ...

SFC's use of Twitter.

Posted Jul 8, 2022 5:42 UTC (Fri) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link]

> In a conversation about the merits of the product, it's lazy -- it's a way to smear the product without giving a proper explanation.

It depends. Making a pun with the name "Fox News" is what you wrote. Calling it "Murdoch TV" is an extremely important reminder that it's "free" only because _you_ are the product - without making fun of the name or smearing anything.

I find "Musktown" closer to the latter.

SFC's use of Twitter.

Posted Jul 8, 2022 5:36 UTC (Fri) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link]

> I can't promise a timeline for it as we have a lot of writing in the pipeline

I bet considering how much time you spend gifting trolls with incredibly detailed and professional answers. Amazing... return on investment for them!

I (sincerely!) hope a fair amount of copy/paste was involved at least? As you explained, it did not look like a brand new question.

Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jun 30, 2022 22:50 UTC (Thu) by josh (subscriber, #17465) [Link]

Says Conservancy on their blog (hosted on Free Software), and on federated services, which they also mirror to Twitter to reach a wider audience. Which is consistent with their suggestions to use GitHub as a mirror, if you can't switch away entirely.

https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/259/257/...

Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jun 30, 2022 23:27 UTC (Thu) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link] (4 responses)

> Github is bad, it's a proprietary platform! Says the SFC on Twitter

The primary focus of this blog post (which itself is free software, aggregated on a proprietary platform which is permissible in their view) is not about the proprietary nature of the platform itself but about the implications of Copilot. I suspect you don't agree with the criticism of Copilot, however deflecting from it using this approach is unhelpful.

Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jul 1, 2022 0:10 UTC (Fri) by bluca (subscriber, #118303) [Link] (3 responses)

'twas just an attempt at a silly joke - I read the post first on Twitter, and found the juxtaposition funny. Evidently it was only funny to me, and that's ok

Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jul 1, 2022 3:46 UTC (Fri) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link]

Ah, ok. I totally did not get the joke. :)

Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jul 1, 2022 6:55 UTC (Fri) by josh (subscriber, #17465) [Link] (1 responses)

Poe's Law in action. It's hard to tell the difference between a joke and a snide comment.

Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jul 1, 2022 10:05 UTC (Fri) by bluca (subscriber, #118303) [Link]

Especially when it's a bad one ;-) My future career as a comedian is in tatters!

Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jul 4, 2022 8:58 UTC (Mon) by LtWorf (subscriber, #124958) [Link] (7 responses)

Are you working at microsoft? https://github.com/bluca

It seems something you should disclose since you are all over the comment section defending copilot (with what I think are fundamentally wrong arguments).

Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jul 4, 2022 11:07 UTC (Mon) by bluca (subscriber, #118303) [Link] (6 responses)

"disclose"? Mate this is a subscriber-only news item comment section, not the Supreme Court

Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jul 4, 2022 12:34 UTC (Mon) by LtWorf (subscriber, #124958) [Link] (5 responses)

> "disclose"? Mate this is a subscriber-only news item comment section, not the Supreme Court

You have 24 comments in this page defending copilot.

It is not a legal requirement that you disclose that you work for microsoft but it would be more honest.

Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jul 4, 2022 12:46 UTC (Mon) by bluca (subscriber, #118303) [Link] (4 responses)

If you remove the tinfoil hat you'll realize the two things have nothing to do with each other

Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jul 4, 2022 15:36 UTC (Mon) by LtWorf (subscriber, #124958) [Link] (3 responses)

Then why not be the bigger person next time and just say so directly yourself?

Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jul 4, 2022 16:30 UTC (Mon) by bluca (subscriber, #118303) [Link] (2 responses)

There's all sort of completely irrelevant things that are not said. I don't care about reading your (or anyone else's) autobiography when reading your comments on an LWN article.

Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jul 10, 2022 1:03 UTC (Sun) by k8to (guest, #15413) [Link]

This sort of disclaimer has been common in internet discussions for 30 years. There's nothing strange in expecting something like "i work for microsoft who owns github but am not involved or especially invested in their take, and my opinions here are my own".

Surely, in low quality environments this is no longer done, but its reasonable and informs discussion as well as protects you.

Software Freedom Conservancy: Give Up GitHub: The Time Has Come!

Posted Jul 11, 2022 21:27 UTC (Mon) by jschrod (subscriber, #1646) [Link]

Sorry - but I'm active on the 'Net since 1985 - and it is quite usual to add such clarifications if you write about a product of the company you're working for.

This is highly relevant.