Are you guys fine with these new shenanigans from Github. I found a bug and wanted to check what has been the development on that, only to find out most of the discussion was hidden by github and requesting me to sign-in to view it.

It threw me straight back to when Microsoft acquired Github and the discussions around the future of opensource on a microsoft owned infrastructure, now microsoft is exploiting free work from the community to train its AI, and building walls around its product, are open source contributors fine with that ?

      • toastal@lemmy.ml
        6·
        8 months ago

        Everything I write on my blog is NC. Realistically, this should be built into the metadata of the comments just like language as I’ve seen some folks get harassed for trying to license their online comments when this is an acceptable thing to do & a nice act of rebellion. Honestly I wish there was more room for things like the Peer Production License & Prosperity License for code to remove the commercial exploitation, but FSF labels in “unfree” & it’s GPL-incompatible so it is treated like cancer when really it’s like Creative Commons Noncommercial but for source code as it’s still allowed to be used by individual workers, nonprofits, etc.

        • onlinepersona@programming.devEnglish
          5·
          8 months ago

          I’ve given up discussing with people who don’t understand this. They are reminiscent of those who mocked people who cared about privacy before Snowden’s revelations, found out they were being spied on, and then inhaled the copium of “I’ve got nothing to hide”.

          As for NC licenses on text, IMO it has to be in the text otherwise it’s too easy clean, but tbf, obvious text like mine is probably easy to clean too.

          Anti Commercial-AI license

      • pop@lemmy.ml
        2·
        8 months ago

        I just scraped your profile and used it for training my commercial AI product. sue me b.