
Why I don't support or contribute to GitHub repositories (2014) - soulchild37
https://wubthecaptain.eu/articles/why-i-dont-support-github.html
======
RubyPinch
A pretty good article about how people form opinions first and then search for
reasons after.

"DCMA is censorship", DCMA is being used as it should, it is not for github to
decide how DCMA works, there is supposed to be a takedown, and then a response
to the takedown, and then time wasting occurs at that point as legal matters
usually entail. This applies to any hosting company within the US.

"Users must provide a name on signup" like any other sign up process with any
other host (if you couldn't tell this was the case from the signup screen,
then well) "GitHub takes no liability for account security" forgetting the
part where it says "[if its the user's fault]" "github can terminate accounts
whenver" is standard for a bloody obvious reason: you never want to have that
"oh BUT YOUR RULES DIDNT SAY I COULDN'T DO X" conversation with anyone when X
is something that no self-respecting adult should do

etc etc

"You shall defend and indemnify GitHub" once again missing the "[if its your
content that caused us to get into this shitstorm]", you can still sue github
without that clause coming into play

------
eXpl0it3r
There are always "bad" sides to things. Yet I personally see the good parts of
GitHub largely outweighing the "bad" parts.

> GitHub wants to control your projects on GitHub

So because they have become popular GitHub now wants to control everyone?
Sounds more paranoid than anything else.

> developers have become enslaved by a large company telling them how to do
> their project management

GitHub provides limited ways to manage your project, but it's not mandatory!
Disable the issue tracker and wiki, and use whatever management tools you
want. Also just because he doesn't like the project management tools GitHub
provides, doesn't imply that everyone has been enslaved and forced to use it.
It _can_ be very useful and comes at no cost and not setup required for Open
Source projects.

> Censorship

Such an overused word. GitHub is not obligated to protect your rights for
freedom of speech. They have Terms of Service and if they judge something as
not fitting for their platforms, they have the right to remove it. That is
_not_ censorship.

Whether the DMCA requests where legitimate or not, is in my opinion something
lawyers should deal with and not random partially biased internet users.

> Terms of Service

The goal of ToS is to protect the company which in turn protects the whole
user base from "bad" users. Again the ToS are not here to provide you security
or protection, but it lays out how you can use the service and what rights
GitHub keeps in case you're determined to be a "bad" user.

What I'm missing from the post is an alternative - if not GitHub what then?
Because I'm sure you'll find similar points for any other Git repository
hosting company, which leaves you with self-hosting. But for self-hosting
people usually forget to calculate for the time spent setting things up,
maintaining it and making sure everything is secure. Especially regarding
security I'd personally trust a company more than co-worker who knows
something about Linux and servers or myself.

------
mpbm
Reminds me of conversations I've had with people who don't understand how tax
brackets and insurance premiums work. They get angry and scared based on their
own flawed perspective. Everything the author cited looks like standard
practice, just slightly obfuscated by legal language.

