Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #237287 > unrolled thread

Re: Offensive variable names

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Offensive variable names "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2021-07-13 09:10 +0200
    Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-07-13 09:30 +0200
      Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2021-07-13 11:00 +0200
        Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-07-13 11:30 +0200
        Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] john doe <johndoe65534@mail.com> - 2021-07-13 11:30 +0200
          Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2021-07-13 12:00 +0200
        Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-07-13 14:10 +0200
          Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Brian Thompson <brian@hashvault.io> - 2021-07-13 14:10 +0200
          Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2021-07-13 15:10 +0200
            Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-07-13 16:20 +0200
              Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-07-13 17:30 +0200
                Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-07-13 18:00 +0200
                Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-07-13 21:40 +0200
                  Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-07-13 22:00 +0200
                    Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-07-13 23:50 +0200
                    Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-07-14 06:10 +0200
                      Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Jeremy Ardley <jeremy@ardley.org> - 2021-07-14 07:00 +0200
                        Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-07-14 16:20 +0200
                          Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2021-07-14 16:30 +0200
              Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Alexandre Garreau <galex-713@galex-713.eu> - 2021-07-13 21:40 +0200
                Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2021-07-13 22:30 +0200
                  [OT] Selling beer (was: Re: Working for free [was: Offensive  variable names]) Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2021-07-14 00:30 +0200
                Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-07-14 01:20 +0200
          Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Alexandre Garreau <galex-713@galex-713.eu> - 2021-07-13 19:30 +0200
            Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-07-13 20:10 +0200
              Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-07-13 20:40 +0200
                Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2021-07-13 21:00 +0200
                  Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-07-13 21:50 +0200
                  Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2021-07-14 00:40 +0200
                  Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside <debian@polynamaude.com> - 2021-07-14 09:40 +0200
                    Re: Working for free "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2021-07-14 09:50 +0200
                      Re: Working for free Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside <debian@polynamaude.com> - 2021-07-14 11:50 +0200
                        Re: Working for free "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2021-07-14 12:40 +0200
                  Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2021-07-14 15:00 +0200
                    Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2021-07-14 15:40 +0200
                    Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-07-14 19:20 +0200
              Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Alexandre Garreau <galex-713@galex-713.eu> - 2021-07-13 21:20 +0200
                Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-07-14 01:20 +0200
                  Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2021-07-14 08:50 +0200
                    Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-07-14 14:10 +0200
                      Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names] Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2021-07-14 15:10 +0200
      Re: Working for free "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2021-07-13 12:10 +0200
        Re: Working for free <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-07-13 12:10 +0200

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#237287 — Re: Offensive variable names

Hi,

Gregory Smith wrote to me:
> You're a bunch of fa*gots.

I think this asterisk is an insufficient surrogate for a classical "bleep".
But thank you for the plural. This enhances my self-esteem.


> Working for free.

Yes. This aspect was always annoying to Microsoft and alike.


> "Professionalism" has no place in hobbies,

If i would not show due diligence when developing, then only clueless people
would use my software. A very important part of this work is to accept
reports about own mistakes and to fix them in the best possible way.
Thinking ahead is a must. There is few excuse for not anticipating problems
which the users might reasonably perceive.


>  white ret*rd.

Does that asterisk stand for an "a" or for an "u" ?
(I'd understand the "u"-case as accusation of coprophagia. But the internet
has it as a slightly different meme.)

You see ? "Bleep" is much better than "*".
Any ambivalence appears intentional and opens a wide range of
interpretations even beyond the malevolent intentions of the writer.

I hope to have helped you with your articulation problems.


Have a nice day :)

Thomas

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#237289 — Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 09:01:20AM +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Gregory Smith wrote to me:
> > You're a bunch of fa*gots.
> 
> I think this asterisk is an insufficient surrogate for a classical "bleep".
> But thank you for the plural. This enhances my self-esteem.
> 
> 
> > Working for free.
> 
> Yes. This aspect was always annoying to Microsoft and alike.

Times have changed. Now Microsoft *loves* free work... done for
them [1].

Not that this enhances my love for Microsoft, mind you. It rather
confirms my initial gut feeling to stay out of Githubs way wherever
I can.

Cheers
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GitHub_Copilot
 - t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237292 — Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

	Hi.

On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 09:20:12AM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > > Working for free.
> > 
> > Yes. This aspect was always annoying to Microsoft and alike.
> 
> Times have changed. Now Microsoft *loves* free work... done for
> them [1].

Nothing had changed in this regard. Every software corporation always
adored enthusiasts doing their job for them. No exceptions.


> Not that this enhances my love for Microsoft, mind you. It rather
> confirms my initial gut feeling to stay out of Githubs way wherever
> I can.

Github (Gitlab, Sourceforge, etc) were and are non-free (as in -
non-gratis) services, so it's only reasonable to stay away from them
regardless of whom is controlling them.

You need to be in control of your code - *you* host it. Always was,
always is. It's not that hard anyway.

Reco

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237296 — Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 11:22:48AM +0200, john doe wrote:
> On 7/13/2021 10:54 AM, Reco wrote:
> >
> >Github (Gitlab, Sourceforge, etc) were and are non-free (as in -
> >non-gratis) services, so it's only reasonable to stay away from them
> >regardless of whom is controlling them.
> >
> >You need to be in control of your code - *you* host it. Always was,
> >always is. It's not that hard anyway.
> >
> 
> So the bottom line is that you need to have a server to host this
> yourself but what do you suggest if you don't have the gears/capacity to
> do it yourself (VPS ...)?

(1) There /are/ alternatives to github (a couple of them)
(2) My post was more targeting at github running advanced
   machine learning (GPT3) over all the free code hosted
   by it. To offer a service telling people how to code
   (talk funny feedback loop).

Point (2) was for me the "aaah, that's why Microsoft threw 7B on the table
to buy GH".

Cheers
 - t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237297 — Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

On 7/13/2021 10:54 AM, Reco wrote:
>
> Github (Gitlab, Sourceforge, etc) were and are non-free (as in -
> non-gratis) services, so it's only reasonable to stay away from them
> regardless of whom is controlling them.
>
> You need to be in control of your code - *you* host it. Always was,
> always is. It's not that hard anyway.
>

So the bottom line is that you need to have a server to host this
yourself but what do you suggest if you don't have the gears/capacity to
do it yourself (VPS ...)?

For the sake of clarity, I'm talking here about the logistical aspect(s)
of not relying on GB/SF/...

--
John Doe

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237298 — Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

	Hi.

On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 11:22:48AM +0200, john doe wrote:
> On 7/13/2021 10:54 AM, Reco wrote:
> > Github (Gitlab, Sourceforge, etc) were and are non-free (as in -
> > non-gratis) services, so it's only reasonable to stay away from them
> > regardless of whom is controlling them.
> > 
> > You need to be in control of your code - *you* host it. Always was,
> > always is. It's not that hard anyway.
> 
> So the bottom line is that you need to have a server to host this
> yourself but what do you suggest if you don't have the gears/capacity to
> do it yourself (VPS ...)?

I suggest them to learn it and deal with it. Quitting software
development is also an option (and in the case of certain programming
languages it's a preferred one), though, there's much more so called
"software developers" that the world really needs anyway.

Relinquishing control is also an option, but there will be consequences.
For instance, that link that tomas had provided. Or all those recent
stories about Github and complying with DMCA.
I'm not saying that the consequences will be there immediately (because
it's never *that* easy), but certainly they will be hard (or impossible)
to anticipate.

Reco

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237307 — Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 11:54:43 +0300
Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> wrote:

> 	Hi.
> 
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 09:20:12AM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > > > Working for free.
> > > 
> > > Yes. This aspect was always annoying to Microsoft and alike.
> > 
> > Times have changed. Now Microsoft *loves* free work... done for
> > them [1].
> 
> Nothing had changed in this regard. Every software corporation always
> adored enthusiasts doing their job for them. No exceptions.
> 
> 
> > Not that this enhances my love for Microsoft, mind you. It rather
> > confirms my initial gut feeling to stay out of Githubs way wherever
> > I can.
> 
> Github (Gitlab, Sourceforge, etc) were and are non-free (as in -
> non-gratis) services, so it's only reasonable to stay away from them
> regardless of whom is controlling them.

What do you mean by calling them non-gratis services? I know that some
of their services are non-gratis, but basic code hosting certainly is
gratis.

> You need to be in control of your code - *you* host it. Always was,
> always is. It's not that hard anyway.

If you maintain a local copy of your code and just push it to Github
for serving it publicly (which is what I do, and what I assume most
developers do), you haven't lost control of your code - if / when the
host does anything you don't like, you take the existing code and make
it available elsewhere, and stop posting future code to the offending
service. (It'll still have a copy of any existing code, of course - but
that's inevitable with FLOSS software regardless of where you host it.)

Celejar

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237308 — Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 08:01:58AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
>If you maintain a local copy of your code and just push it to Github
>for serving it publicly (which is what I do, and what I assume most
>developers do), you haven't lost control of your code - if / when the
>host does anything you don't like, you take the existing code and make
>it available elsewhere, and stop posting future code to the offending
>service. (It'll still have a copy of any existing code, of course - but
>that's inevitable with FLOSS software regardless of where you host it.)

Agreed. Plus, as long as you have a proper license, like GPLv3, then you
should be good to host your code on a provider like GitHub, or at least
use that host as a mirror.

-- 
Best regards,

Brian T

Coronavirus is a scam.
9/11 was an inside job.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237311 — Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 08:01:58AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > Github (Gitlab, Sourceforge, etc) were and are non-free (as in -
> > non-gratis) services, so it's only reasonable to stay away from them
> > regardless of whom is controlling them.
> 
> What do you mean by calling them non-gratis services? I know that some
> of their services are non-gratis, but basic code hosting certainly is
> gratis.

You do not pay for these services, yet they provide them to you and
everyone else (with certain exclusions).
Guess who is the product here? The answer is - you are the product.
Payment involving money is not the only kind of payment that you can
make today.


> > You need to be in control of your code - *you* host it. Always was,
> > always is. It's not that hard anyway.
> 
> If you maintain a local copy of your code and just push it to Github
> for serving it publicly (which is what I do, and what I assume most
> developers do), you haven't lost control of your code

And then you take out your Github repository in compliance with DMCA
claim (bonus points for false DMCA claim).
Whoops - suddenly you've lost a chunk of your userbase, possibly
- some of your contributors, bug reports, CI/CD pipeline, and that's a
  non-exhaustive list.


> - if / when the host does anything you don't like, you take the
> existing code and make it available elsewhere, and stop posting future
> code to the offending service. (It'll still have a copy of any
> existing code, of course - but that's inevitable with FLOSS software
> regardless of where you host it.)

But the "code" aka git repository is not the only thing that's provided
by such companies, and the temptation to use these other services (that
are also provided "free" of charge) is way too great for the most.

You've kept your code in the scenario above, but what good did it gave
you?


I don't argue that there are "safe" ways of using these services
(aforementioned "code dump" is one of them). Problem is - if the risks
of using these services need to be explained to the participants of
debian-user - it's not possible to explain the same to the happy GitHub
crowd.

Reco

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237314 — Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 16:08:53 +0300
Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 08:01:58AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > > Github (Gitlab, Sourceforge, etc) were and are non-free (as in -
> > > non-gratis) services, so it's only reasonable to stay away from them
> > > regardless of whom is controlling them.
> > 
> > What do you mean by calling them non-gratis services? I know that some
> > of their services are non-gratis, but basic code hosting certainly is
> > gratis.
> 
> You do not pay for these services, yet they provide them to you and
> everyone else (with certain exclusions).
> Guess who is the product here? The answer is - you are the product.
> Payment involving money is not the only kind of payment that you can
> make today.

I think that's an unreasonable definition of gratis and non-gratis. If
a FLOSS dev gets an ego boost, or even some sort of spiritual
satisfaction, from people using his software, does that mean it's
non-gratis?

> > > You need to be in control of your code - *you* host it. Always was,
> > > always is. It's not that hard anyway.
> > 
> > If you maintain a local copy of your code and just push it to Github
> > for serving it publicly (which is what I do, and what I assume most
> > developers do), you haven't lost control of your code
> 
> And then you take out your Github repository in compliance with DMCA
> claim (bonus points for false DMCA claim).
> Whoops - suddenly you've lost a chunk of your userbase, possibly
> - some of your contributors, bug reports, CI/CD pipeline, and that's a
>   non-exhaustive list.

Those are certainly legitimate concerns, although none of that really
means that you're "not in control of your code." I see that you
yourself acknowledge this below.

> > - if / when the host does anything you don't like, you take the
> > existing code and make it available elsewhere, and stop posting future
> > code to the offending service. (It'll still have a copy of any
> > existing code, of course - but that's inevitable with FLOSS software
> > regardless of where you host it.)
> 
> But the "code" aka git repository is not the only thing that's provided
> by such companies, and the temptation to use these other services (that
> are also provided "free" of charge) is way too great for the most.
> 
> You've kept your code in the scenario above, but what good did it gave
> you?
> 
> 
> I don't argue that there are "safe" ways of using these services
> (aforementioned "code dump" is one of them). Problem is - if the risks
> of using these services need to be explained to the participants of
> debian-user - it's not possible to explain the same to the happy GitHub
> crowd.

We are in basic agreement. I'm not really a "developer" - I just host
some relatively simple projects on Github. I agree that a deeper use of
something like Github is something I'd have to carefully consider.

Celejar

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237315 — Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

> We are in basic agreement. I'm not really a "developer" - I just host
> some relatively simple projects on Github. I agree that a deeper use of
> something like Github is something I'd have to carefully consider.

BTW, for those who don't want to run their own server, there are still
other reasons to avoid Github: my rule is to try and opt for the
underdog so as to foster competition.


        Stefan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237320 — Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 11:27:03 -0400
Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:

> > We are in basic agreement. I'm not really a "developer" - I just host
> > some relatively simple projects on Github. I agree that a deeper use of
> > something like Github is something I'd have to carefully consider.
> 
> BTW, for those who don't want to run their own server, there are still
> other reasons to avoid Github: my rule is to try and opt for the
> underdog so as to foster competition.

I agree. I may reconsider using Github going forward.

Celejar

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237328 — Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

On Tuesday, July 13, 2021 11:27:03 AM Stefan Monnier wrote:
> BTW, for those who don't want to run their own server, there are still
> other reasons to avoid Github: my rule is to try and opt for the
> underdog so as to foster competition.

+1

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237331 — Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

On Tue 13 Jul 2021 at 15:38:26 -0400, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:

> On Tuesday, July 13, 2021 11:27:03 AM Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > BTW, for those who don't want to run their own server, there are still
> > other reasons to avoid Github: my rule is to try and opt for the
> > underdog so as to foster competition.
> 
> +1

You are apparently well up in this field. Is there a particular
udderdog you would recommend?

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237333 — Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

On Tuesday, July 13, 2021 03:54:22 PM Brian wrote:
> On Tue 13 Jul 2021 at 15:38:26 -0400, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, July 13, 2021 11:27:03 AM Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > > BTW, for those who don't want to run their own server, there are still
> > > other reasons to avoid Github: my rule is to try and opt for the
> > > underdog so as to foster competition.
> > 
> > +1
> 
> You are apparently well up in this field. Is there a particular
> udderdog you would recommend?

No, sorry.  I was speaking more in generalities, I almost always try to 
support the underdog.

(The last time I was somewhat actively involved in development (~2018), the 
developer I was working with chose to use github and I did not argue about it, 
and am not sure I would have at that time -- not sure who owned it then.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237349 — Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Ma, 13 iul 21, 20:54:22, Brian wrote:
> On Tue 13 Jul 2021 at 15:38:26 -0400, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> > On Tuesday, July 13, 2021 11:27:03 AM Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > > BTW, for those who don't want to run their own server, there are still
> > > other reasons to avoid Github: my rule is to try and opt for the
> > > underdog so as to foster competition.
> > 
> > +1
> 
> You are apparently well up in this field. Is there a particular
> udderdog you would recommend?

As far as I understand Gitlab is the only comparable alternative, 
preferably self-hosted (like Debian's Salsa).

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237350 — Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 14/7/21 12:09 pm, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Ma, 13 iul 21, 20:54:22, Brian wrote:
>> On Tue 13 Jul 2021 at 15:38:26 -0400, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, July 13, 2021 11:27:03 AM Stefan Monnier wrote:
>>>> BTW, for those who don't want to run their own server, there are still
>>>> other reasons to avoid Github: my rule is to try and opt for the
>>>> underdog so as to foster competition.
>>> +1
>> You are apparently well up in this field. Is there a particular
>> udderdog you would recommend?
> As far as I understand Gitlab is the only comparable alternative,
> preferably self-hosted (like Debian's Salsa).
>
> Kind regards,
> Andrei
-- 

AWS has a permanently free GIT repository for small projects (under 5 
developers) and limited storage requirements


https://aws.amazon.com/codecommit/


Jeremy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237381 — Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

Jeremy Ardley [2021-07-14 12:52:10] wrote:
> On 14/7/21 12:09 pm, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>> On Ma, 13 iul 21, 20:54:22, Brian wrote:
>>> On Tue 13 Jul 2021 at 15:38:26 -0400, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, July 13, 2021 11:27:03 AM Stefan Monnier wrote:
>>>>> BTW, for those who don't want to run their own server, there are still
>>>>> other reasons to avoid Github: my rule is to try and opt for the
>>>>> underdog so as to foster competition.
>>>> +1
>>> You are apparently well up in this field. Is there a particular
>>> udderdog you would recommend?
>> As far as I understand Gitlab is the only comparable alternative,
>> preferably self-hosted (like Debian's Salsa).
> AWS has a permanently free GIT repository for small projects (under
>  5 developers) and limited storage requirements
> https://aws.amazon.com/codecommit/

Then again, I'm not sure that Amazon qualifies as an "underdog".


        Stefan


PS: Your reply's text was oddly "hidden" inside your signature (as
defined by the old convention that "\n-- \n" separates the main body
from the signature).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237382 — Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 2021-07-14 at 10:17, Stefan Monnier wrote:

> PS: Your reply's text was oddly "hidden" inside your signature (as 
> defined by the old convention that "\n-- \n" separates the main body 
> from the signature).

Looking back at the preceding mails, I suspect that what may have
happened is not that the reply text was inserted after the new mail's
signature separator, but that when quoting Andrei's mail in order to
reply, Andrei's signature separator (from the previous mail) was left
outside of the quote.

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237327 — Re: Working for free [was: Offensive variable names]

Le mardi 13 juillet 2021, 16:09:50 CEST Celejar a écrit :
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 16:08:53 +0300
> 
> Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 08:01:58AM -0400, Celejar wrote:
> > > > Github (Gitlab, Sourceforge, etc) were and are non-free (as in -
> > > > non-gratis) services, so it's only reasonable to stay away from
> > > > them
> > > > regardless of whom is controlling them.
> > > 
> > > What do you mean by calling them non-gratis services? I know that
> > > some
> > > of their services are non-gratis, but basic code hosting certainly
> > > is
> > > gratis.
> > 
> > You do not pay for these services, yet they provide them to you and
> > everyone else (with certain exclusions).
> > Guess who is the product here? The answer is - you are the product.
> > Payment involving money is not the only kind of payment that you can
> > make today.
> 
> I think that's an unreasonable definition of gratis and non-gratis. If
> a FLOSS dev gets an ego boost, or even some sort of spiritual
> satisfaction, from people using his software, does that mean it's
> non-gratis?

An ego-boost doesn’t grant power, that is, possibility of action of your 
will on the actions of others.

But github as a platform provides a great deal of power to microsoft.  
They litterally own your data.  Maybe not your programs, but maybe all 
your metadata + what was listed later (bugreports, etc.).

The mail you answer to sadly didn’t explain concretely what is the 
payement, and how you can make money from it.  The answer is: selling 
personal data.  Both what you output, what comes from you, and what is 
inputted to you, what to see.  Knowing what you say, what you see, what 
you like to see, and deciding it sells very profitably nowadays, agueably 
more than oil.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web