> let us download our private repositories and also make them public (setting control).
> change their restriction policies to not limiting users based on their Nationality.
I don't see this happening. It's US law and github (Microsoft) is bound by it. Maybe a competitor will use it to their advantage and offer
> announce their decision publicly and apologize for making this situation (like what slack did before in the same situation: https://slackhq.com/an-apology-and-an-update).
I can see how the PR team will issue a careful worded letter or blog post. It will say "we regret the situation" but I doubt be an apology.
That seems like a terrible situation. What if tomorrow there's a US law that <insert ridiculous thing which "everybody" says won't happen until the day it happens>
Maybe they should fork into GitHub US, GitHub EU and so on.
In this case, if GitHub EU is owned by Microsoft, a US company, GitHub EU still must follow US rules. On the flip side, while GitHub EU must follow GDPR, GitHub US would not be required to do so.
Continuing to offer various free services would be nice.
Financial support of open source is a nice thing, but folding open source into the world of US political choas seems so wrong.
I for one will be moving my projects elsewhere. Not sure where yet, probably a bitbucket server.
I'm not a huge fan of these sanctions. Though I do think Microsoft is following the law in a fairly standard fashion.
I don't know what to think about this 'message to GitHub' since they can't do anything about this, but I think that migrating off of GitHub and lessening or completely removing our dependence on the service is probably better for those developers and for open-source in general.
Today Iran, tomorrow who knows?
Far easier to take a couple days to move my stuff now than having to do it under duress in a year or two.
If current conditions are not a good predictor for future conditions, isn't it equally likely that other countries (same as the US), could change in the future to sanction other countries and restrict online services operated there?
On the other hand, blocking Iranian GitHub accounts is helping to change Iran regime? Are Iranian GitHub Users developing nuclear bombs there?
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
(Property includes intellectual property, such as computer code.)
(Due Process includes (but is not limited to) Trial by a Jury of one's peers...)
To understand this by analogy, the word "Computer" might mean something with a screen, mouse and keyboard to some people, but it have a much deeper meaning to a Computer Engineer, Operating System Developer, Compiler Writer, or Applied Mathematician.
That's because the concept of "Computer" is intricately, intricately weaved around all sorts of interrelated technical concepts, and the result is something of sheer engineering beauty...
"Due Process" similarly, is intricately, intricately interweaved with many other concepts in Law. That's the "Due Process" that the Founding Fathers are talking about (they having had extensive backgrounds in Law).
To someone who hasn't studied Law, it would appear as two shallow words, but I assure you -- study Law and you will find these words have many more dimensions than their mere dictionary definitions...
So no, probably not.
On the other hand, I would presume that anyone who works for the U.S. Government has accepted the U.S. Constitution, either explicitly (by Oath) and/or implicitly (by the act of working for the U.S. Government).
Why is this important?
Well, see, if those people are in charge of creating/enforcing sanctions, they are also contractually obligated to do so while NOT BREAKING THEIR CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION TO UPHOLD EACH AND EVERY ASPECT OF THE CONSTITUTION.
One of the things that The Constitution says (above) is that people (all people by the way, not just some of a specific nationality, and not just those that have accepted the Constitution) are NOT to be deprived of their property without Due Process (which includes but is not limited to a Trial By a Jury of one's peers).
So... you do the math.
Sanctions are duly enforced laws.
That's a lot of books on Law.
You seem to be telling me (by implication) that
a) That the sanctions are absolute, because they are Law.
b) That all people, under all circumstances, must follow all absolute Laws.
c) That in the 2.8 million Law books, there are no conflicting Law or Laws.
d) That in the 2.8 million Law books, there are no Laws, written at an earlier time, that govern the passage of laws at a later time, and what they may or may not contain;
e) That no trials, nor court interpretation of a Law in the broader context of all other Laws -- are necessary ever.
f) That courts have never interpreted similar Laws and changed, modified, and/or deleted their efficacy;
If I am misreading you then please feel free to correct me.
But, my point is simply this. If someone placed $1,000,000 on a table, and told me to bet that that "Law" was absolute in all of its aspects, and that he would bet against me, based on what I know, I could not take that bet...
This is an completely understandable reaction regarding Github's block against Iranian accounts. Github as been around for over 10 years, and this never happened before.
No, but I expect them to at least understand ONE law, since the sanctions affect their country significantly and their politicians talk non-stop about it.
> might follow from Microsoft's acquisition?
This has nothing to do with MSFT. GitHub has always been a US-based company.
> Github as been around for over 10 years, and this never happened before
Because GitHub hadn't been following the law before.
Suggestion: move you repositories! Host your own repositories! Use something different, like Gerrit, to spice up your development! Take matters in your own hand! Own your data, own your compute!
BTW, this is why I deleted my account at GitHub the day the purchase was announced.
Perhaps the time to self-host your projects just like how Mastodon allows self-hosting an instance is more important than ever, which will probably be better for open-source instead of centralizing and increasing our dependency on GitHub.
The complete lack of basic empathy is just baffling.
It's amazing how people don't see that this isn't because of human rights. It's literally one country bullying another.
You most likely already do that without any sanctions that affect you.
It sucks, but that's the whole point of sanctions.
Iranians and US citizens should protest against their governments causing this political situation. From my limited research, neither party is innocent. Bothering GitHub doesn't have a purpose, they are only blocking Iranians to comply with laws.
Can‘t you see that the people asking for support are not „enemies of america“ but instead people who consider the Trump administrations policies to be an abberation, non-representative of the will of the american people, who they consider to be their friends and Open-Source-Community Brothers ?
Edit: Happy to take the karma hit. Stupid is stupid, regardless of jurisdiction and consequences.
Microsoft has obviously turned a corner recently into dramatic support for open source collaboration. They're pushing VSCode. They bought github. They support linux. None of us will be surprised to hear that they're seeking to buy StackExchange or Discord soon.
I'm saying: if these are their true colors, then they mount a full-throated resistance to this nonsense. They have the legal team, the technical talent, and the political connections to do so.
Start by refusing to take down Github Pages of nationals of sanctioned countries and refusing to disappear repositories maintained by the same, absent a specific court order. Then, challenge it in court.
Will the US Government have the gall to go to Seattle and cuff somebody over this? If they do, it will be a major international incident and rallying cry, and that person (and Microsoft) will look internationally heroic.
Plenty more explanation here:
We'd finally get the actual sanctions clarified.
its technically quite feasible..there's no reason the US government gets to decide who writes open source software. and there's no reason github has to play a role here if they choose or are forced to act this way.
The stakes are not high here.
Iran threatens to nuke other countries as soon as they can develop the nukes. They are in the process of trying to take over the whole middle ease, fighting in Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, etc. This has repercussions for the people living there.
Why do people from such countries have to doubly suffer, because not one but two governments are fucking them up?
BTW you're literally advocating against freedom.
> The 1953 Iranian coup d'état, known in Iran as the 28 Mordad coup d'état (Persian: کودتای ۲۸ مرداد), was the overthrow of the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in favour of strengthening the monarchical rule of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi on 19 August 1953, orchestrated by the United States (under the name TPAJAX Project or "Operation Ajax") and the United Kingdom (under the name "Operation Boot"). It was the first covert action of the United States to overthrow a foreign government during peacetime.
> The Iranian Revolution (Persian: انقلاب ایران, romanized: Enqelābe Irān;), also known as the Islamic Revolution or the 1979 Revolution, was a series of events that involved the overthrow of the last monarch of Iran, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, and the replacement of his government with an Islamic republic under the Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, a leader of one of the factions in the revolt. The movement against the United States-backed monarchy was supported by various leftist and Islamist organizations and student movements.
"these terrible places" == "The US"?
> armed rebellion
Armed. Definitely, the US was meant.