• 2 Posts
  • 25 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
cake
Cake day: February 19th, 2024

help-circle

  • 80 steps too far down the capitalism ladder

    This is the result of capitalism - corporations (aka the rich selfish assholes running them) will always attempt to do horrible things to earn more money, so long as they can get away with it, and only perhaps pay relatively small fines. The people who did this face no jailtime, face no real consequences - this is what unregulated capitalism brings. Corporations should not have rights or protect the people who run them - the people who run them need to face prison and personal consequences. (edited for spelling and missing word)


  • random9@lemmy.worldOPtoComic Strips@lemmy.worldYay! The system is fixed!
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    In the US if you give a politician money in exchange for voting against a bill, it’s illegal (it’s called “quid-pro-quo” in lawyer terms)

    But if you just donate money to the politician, his family, or his campaign, without requesting anything - and then he “coincidentally” happens to vote against the bill which you didn’t want, it is perfectly legal.

    Basically, many politicians are regularly doing something clearly unethical and corrupt in a technically “legal” way.









  • A lot of people associated with Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) have major objections to GitHub. Here’s one summary: https://sfconservancy.org/GiveUpGitHub/

    But the TLDR; version is roughly:

    • Your source hosted on GitHub is being used to train AI, and you are possibly giving up rights to algorithms you may have written (IANAL, and AI training is a fuzzy topic at the moment)
    • GitHub itself is proprietary, closed-source software, while they claim to be pro-FOSS. Aside from not being in the spirit of things, closed-source means you also don’t know what happens with your code/data once up upload it.
    • Microsoft has a history of being anti-FOSS, while some people will say it’s been changing, I think many are still rightfully concerned what their future decisions regarding GitHub might be, especially if they are a near-monopoly.

    Alternative do exist, and some like codeberg.org are specifically open sourced, and pro-open source, so many people are pushing to move hosting away from GitHub and onto other options.





  • The specific repo in question had (and still has) a USAGE section.

    And again, I have to point out that it is a python script, not an executable - it’s not standard, common or expected that python scripts be provided as a standalone executable. What makes you think even if there was a download link the guy would have gone down to find it?

    Metaphors aside, the guy who originally posted this literally went on a source code-hosting website that primarily aims at making source sharing easier, yelling that he didn’t want to see said source-code, only an executable for a product that literally does not compile to an executable, did not bother reading the instructions, but instead posted on a public forum, in full arrogance, insulting developers by calling them “SMELLY NERDS”.

    I’m astounded that there’s still people defending this guy like that’s a totally normal thing to do.

    If you only want to download an executable, GitHub is NOT the best place to look for that. Yes, many developers do provide compiled versions of their code, and yes, it is often very convenient that they do so - but it is neither the intended purpose of GitHub, nor is it required that developers provide one.


  • The point, which you missed, is that going to github, a source code hosting service, to look for downloading executables for your specific platform - is like going to a farmer’s market to try and get a ready made meal. You’re at the wrong place, and it’s not meant for you if that’s what you’re looking for.

    Github is fairly user friendly, but it’s users are developers.



  • random9@lemmy.worldtoMicroblog Memes@lemmy.worldScript kiddies
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    For what architecture? You use windows, what about Linux? What about MacOS? Should the author spend their time making an executable for each platform? Or only the platforms that are most popular? (Edit: also, I’m not going to touch the fact that for complex programs there are third party dependencies which have license restrictions to be bundled together into an exe or provided into a zip as a dll, which is extra work for the dev to do just to make an exe)

    Secondly, as I pointed out in my above comment which you seemed to have missed:

    Some code, as is literally the case for the original source does NOT run via a standalone executable, so there is NO exe to upload. It is run via third party interpreters, in this case the Python interpreter.

    There’s a section about how to run the code in the original post for example here https://github.com/sherlock-project/sherlock?tab=readme-ov-file#usage - it requires the source code (because its not compiled, it’s interpreted) and installing python - which then is used via python3 sherlock to run the tool. Again, in cases like this there is literally no executable to upload. There may be some roundabout ways to upload an executable that packages, but that’s way beyond just providing the source to be run via python.

    Also to edit to say this: Regardless of how “easy” you may think uploading an exe for something might be, calling the people developing that code “stupid smelly nerds” as the original poster did (not you) is completely disrespectful, arrogant and entitled, and if someone demanded that I upload an exe to one of my repos like that, I would completely ignore their request.


  • random9@lemmy.worldtoMicroblog Memes@lemmy.worldScript kiddies
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    I would suggest that github is the wrong place to go look for that. Github is for developers, primarily a place to share source code, for people who DO care about build files, deprecated classes, contributors, and git history - so they can make the software that runs large parts of the modern world more efficient and flexible.

    Whether there’s an executable provided is completely optional and up to each author. Further, considering in this specific example it was python code, it’s far more flexible for the author to provide python run instructions (which the author HAD provided by the way) than it is to give you a .exe which would take extra, unnecessary effort, and overlooks that the tool he was writing could also be used on linux and macos based machines (because python command exist on those)


  • random9@lemmy.worldtoMicroblog Memes@lemmy.worldScript kiddies
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    116
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    9 months ago

    I agree that github is for developers or people who at the very least don’t mind learning a bit of development and getting their hands dirty. The poster demanding an exe is quite entitled - and also from what I understand the repo he is referring to is a python repo, so there normally wouldn’t be an exe, it’d just be run via a python command.

    There’s a bigger problem here, which is that technical skill in newer generations is also decreasing - as someone on reddit had once said “I’m a millennial and I’m doing tech support for my parents as well as my children”. A generation raised on tablets and phones have gotten the false impression of being tech savy, when their actual technical skill is using end products.

    Expecting every github repo to provide you with something you just click-and-run is overlooking the complexities and reality of how code is. By it self that isn’t a problem, but the entitlement it takes to publicly and arrogantly post that on a public forum is astounding and counter-productive to people who work on those small repos.