Not that I condone Microsoft, but if it is a sanctioned country (Russia, Iran, North Korea, etc.). Microsoft will be in shit with the US government if they let it there.
If the project has contributors from there, then I guess they need to move off GitHub like they did.
All fair but with current us foreign policy I really have hard time respecting their authority on anything
Mega corps gonna mega corp so that why there is a need for decentralization where possible. Otherwise we are all gonna be enslaved by a few mentally ill people with out any check or balace.
This is a really strong argument for not depending on non-federated, centrally controlled services. It doesn’t matter which country or company is behind Your Favorite Service™, they can be legally mandated to by Oppressive Regime (“it could never happen in my country!”), or they could just be arbitrary assholes.
I don’t care why Microsoft did it. I moved off Github when MS acquired them, although in this case it probably wouldn’t have made a difference. Regardless, what it proves is that you can not rely on a monopoly.
If I interpret this toot correctly, there wasn’t a direct commit from a sanctioned region, but one developer was in one of those regions for a short while quite some time ago. And he may have been flagged because of this.
Problem is that unless the person was paid for contributing, what goods or services are being exchanged with the project. I mean if Microsoft received money from that person for a subscription or something I might see them having to ban the user and refund the money. But what did the project receive that would violate sanctions? Volunteer work is usually not covered or else relief organizations and religious missionaries would be banned and the US historically loves sending those. What am I missing?
I mean blocking specific countries is stupid anyway. Historically China has been playing games with the EU and the US on a geopolitical level. But: Chinese, European as well as American researchers have been at the core of research on current topics like AI, security, etc. Btw. ironically the scientific landscape is very collaborative and borders on a federated model, it’s actually pretty neat how much researchers don’t care about country of origin.
What I’m saying is introducing geopolitics into open source development or research is one of the most stupid things to do, because it punishes both your and the other country and only benefits uninvolved third parties. It’s literally shooting yourself in the foot.
Not that I condone Microsoft, but if it is a sanctioned country (Russia, Iran, North Korea, etc.). Microsoft will be in shit with the US government if they let it there.
If the project has contributors from there, then I guess they need to move off GitHub like they did.
So now we know how to instantly delist any project on GitHub.
Step 1: Get write access to the project you dislike.
Seems like a vulnerability to exploit
My guess is there is an admin that knows where each contributor is from. And can approve or decline check in requests.
All fair but with current us foreign policy I really have hard time respecting their authority on anything
Mega corps gonna mega corp so that why there is a need for decentralization where possible. Otherwise we are all gonna be enslaved by a few mentally ill people with out any check or balace.
Yeah I don’t disagree. Corporations shouldn’t exist imo, but they do and if you don’t want to host your own things then we have to work with them.
Or with cooperatives. Cooperatives are a good alternative to corporations.
Cooperatives are still a corporation, but the ownership is distributed more than the CEO style corporation we are used to.
This is a really strong argument for not depending on non-federated, centrally controlled services. It doesn’t matter which country or company is behind Your Favorite Service™, they can be legally mandated to by Oppressive Regime (“it could never happen in my country!”), or they could just be arbitrary assholes.
I don’t care why Microsoft did it. I moved off Github when MS acquired them, although in this case it probably wouldn’t have made a difference. Regardless, what it proves is that you can not rely on a monopoly.
If I interpret this toot correctly, there wasn’t a direct commit from a sanctioned region, but one developer was in one of those regions for a short while quite some time ago. And he may have been flagged because of this.
Problem is that unless the person was paid for contributing, what goods or services are being exchanged with the project. I mean if Microsoft received money from that person for a subscription or something I might see them having to ban the user and refund the money. But what did the project receive that would violate sanctions? Volunteer work is usually not covered or else relief organizations and religious missionaries would be banned and the US historically loves sending those. What am I missing?
Apparently Github is OK with Iran:
https://github.blog/news-insights/policy-news-and-insights/advancing-developer-freedom-github-is-fully-available-in-iran/
https://github.blog/news-insights/policy-news-and-insights/github-supports-internet-freedom-and-global-availability-in-iran/
I mean blocking specific countries is stupid anyway. Historically China has been playing games with the EU and the US on a geopolitical level. But: Chinese, European as well as American researchers have been at the core of research on current topics like AI, security, etc. Btw. ironically the scientific landscape is very collaborative and borders on a federated model, it’s actually pretty neat how much researchers don’t care about country of origin.
What I’m saying is introducing geopolitics into open source development or research is one of the most stupid things to do, because it punishes both your and the other country and only benefits uninvolved third parties. It’s literally shooting yourself in the foot.