Skip Navigation

GitHub Is Not Open Source, A Rant

listed.to Github is Not Open Source | Juliette — I write

Github is Not Open Source | Juliette — I write

Github is Not Open Source | Juliette — I write
103

You're viewing a single thread.

103 comments
  • Content warning: this is a rant from a teenager who has strong opinions.

    Okay...

    However, it holds a monopoly on software.

    You don't know what a "monopoly" is.

    they could just go “Boop! You’re gone!” and there’s nothing I could do about it other than move forges.

    Yeah, nothing you could do about it, other than moving to one of the many other git hosts. Monopoly!

    And then after listing off a whole bunch of alternative git hosts...

    Centralization is not bad by itself but it’s bad when there’s no other option. There just needs to be ways to contribute to code without having to use Github.

    You have plenty of ways to do that, and you know that because you just listed them. Github is not a monopoly.

    Also, I don't see the concept of open source mentioned at any point in this rant.

    • You don't know what a "monopoly" is.

      What the author is probably searching for is "vendor-lockin", which is an anticompetitive practice for so long that it became the way many companies rely their business on. It favors established products over new-comers by making switching offerings difficult/expensive or even impossible, thus better products often have no chance of competing in a field, that was dominated by a single supplier for a while.

      IMO there should be strict regulations and high fines associated with it, because it hinders innovation massively across all industries.

      The cost of switching away from github for a project is high, but not as high as in other fields.

    • Ye, i went to this post diagonally and it felt like a rant without any merit. Dont get me wrong, i dont fully like github either but this was just a waste of time to read...

    • So, is google not a monopoly because there are other search engines out there? Does Apple not have a monopoly among US teenagers because there are Android phones available? Does Microsoft not have a monopoly in desktop computing because Apple and Linux exist or because phones exist?

      What is your definition of monopoly and how does Github not fit it? I'm genuinely curious.

      Anti Commercial AI thingy

      CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

      Inserted with a keystroke running this script on linux with X11

      #!/usr/bin/env nix-shell
      #!nix-shell -i bash --packages xautomation xclip
      
      sleep 0.2
      (echo '::: spoiler Anti Commercial AI thingy
      [CC BY-NC-SA 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/)
      
      Inserted with a keystroke running this script on linux with X11
      ```bash'
      cat "$0"
      echo '```
      :::') | xclip -selection clipboard
      xte "keydown Control_L" "key V" "keyup Control_L"
      
      
      • So, is google not a monopoly because there are other search engines out there?

        It isn't. There are other search engines. People use Google because it's the best, not because it's the only one available. If Google became a horrible search engine, people would switch no problem

        Does Apple not have a monopoly among US teenagers because there are Android phones available?

        Yes. Although Apple is preferred in this public (of which I don't know a lot about, so I won't try to guess why), Android is always an option. And a cheaper one, usually. This forces Apple to differentiate themselves by giving the best in what their users want (premium quality and status, I guess).

        Does Microsoft not have a monopoly in desktop computing because Apple and Linux exist or because phones exist?

        Same point.

        What is your definition of monopoly and how does Github not fit it?

        A monopoly is when a company is the only one in a market niche. Not the most prominent one.

        • A monopoly is when a company is the only one in a market niche. Not the most prominent one.

          What would you call the latter then?

          Anti Commercial AI thingy

          CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

          Inserted with a keystroke running this script on linux with X11

          #!/usr/bin/env nix-shell
          #!nix-shell -i bash --packages xautomation xclip
          
          sleep 0.2
          (echo '::: spoiler Anti Commercial AI thingy
          [CC BY-NC-SA 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/)
          
          Inserted with a keystroke running this script on linux with X11
          ```bash'
          cat "$0"
          echo '```
          :::') | xclip -selection clipboard
          xte "keydown Control_L" "key V" "keyup Control_L"
          
          
          • I don't think there's a precise name for that, since it can be a lot of complex things. A monopoly is a very defined thing, that was my point.

            A company can be prominent because it is just better at giving what the consumers want. That's the case of Google (as a search engine). I use Duck Duck Go, but very often I have to fallback to Google because DDG's results are just not quite right.

            It can be prominent because what it does is very expensive and so only a few can even try it. That's again the case with Google. Creating a good search engine is hard, and Google just got more money to throw at it. That's also the case of Apple. What they are selling (premium products with very high quality and stability) is inherently expensive, and such they don't face a lot of competition (Sansung I guess). Many big corp will lobby the government to artificially make the market more expensive so they can rule out small fish (don't quote me on that, I'll not elaborate further).

            A company can also turn itself into a conglomerate, merging, buying and assimilating other companies. That's the case with AbInbev here in Brazil. They assimilated most of the beer companies. It is very hard (in my opinion impossible) for this to turn into a monopoly, because there will be other big fish trying to play the same game (Petrópolis and Heineken in this case, for example), and there will always be those companies that will not accept being bought, hoping they will be the next big fish.

            I'm not making any judgement of value here, I hate big corporations, but I think we should put blame where blame is due, and not attack straw men and use water down terms, because that's pretty weak.

          • Duopoly?

    • You don’t know what a “monopoly” is.

      Do you though? A clarification that most people miss : "In economics, a monopoly is a single seller. In law, a monopoly is a business entity that has significant market power, that is, the power to charge overly high prices, which is associated with a decrease in social surplus." (from Wikipedia) So are you 100% sure that the author was talking from an economical rather than legal viewpoint?

      So sure, in theoretical economics GitHub is not a monopoly, rather it's part of an oligopoly. Yet, in law, it is in practice a monopoly. GitHub is so big that it does shape the market of collaborating on (open-source) software, even though alternatives do exist.

    • Thing about sharing the internet with newly minted teenagers is that they haven't been around these streets nearly as long as us. They apparently dont know the history of the net as well as the timeline of the most popular sites.

      Maybe schools need to start teaching internet history class or something. If only schools in the USA weren't terrible when it comes to anything tech.

      • This isn't even a problem with historical awareness, OP knows that Github isn't a monopoly. They listed off a bunch of alternatives in their rant. I'm really not sure what they were even complaining about.

    • Not like you can just visit some other selfhosted community on lemmy or reddit and see how others started hosting a local git appliance for their scripts and what not.

    • Well, if you want to contribute to a project to github then you are pretty fucked if the gate keepers won't let you

      • You're not "pretty fucked". Just use one of the many other git hosts out there. OP himself lists some of them in his rant.

        • You didn't seem to read what I said. I can't force other projects that I don't own off github.

          • Actually, you can do exactly that. Fork them.

            You can't force the people who are using Github to follow you, of course. But that's every individual's choice.

        • How do you contribute to project on Github from a different git host?

          • Oh, that's what you meant. How do you contribute to a project on any git host if that git host won't let you? In what way is GitHub any different from that?

            • Its different in that other platforms aren't run by evil corporations that could decide to deplatform a user.

              • You think Microsoft is the only "evil corporation" among these? That's very naive. Any hosting service will deplatform users when they can see a profit to be made from doing so.

    • Cut them some slack. They're at an age where they're trying to assert their independence and their brain is still developing. They've got time to mature and find more worthy fights over which to spill words. Or maybe they'll remain smooth-brained. But either way, right now they're not at their best.

You've viewed 103 comments.