zlacker

[return to "GitHub is now free for teams"]
1. natfri+V2[view] [source] 2020-04-14 16:19:39
>>ig0r0+(OP)
Hi HN, I'm the CEO of GitHub. Everyone at GitHub is really excited about this announcement, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

We've wanted to make this change for the last 18 months, but needed our Enterprise business to be big enough to enable the free use of GitHub by the rest of the world. I'm happy to say that it's grown dramatically in the last year, and so we're able to make GitHub free for teams that don't need Enterprise features.

We also retained our Team pricing plan for people who need email support (and a couple of other features like code owners).

In general we think that every developer on earth should be able to use GitHub for their work, and so it is great to remove price as a barrier.

◧◩
2. pubby+96[view] [source] 2020-04-14 16:34:22
>>natfri+V2
Hey Nat glad to see you here. A few days ago one of the biggest team collaborative games (Space Station 13) got banned on GitHub without a public explanation from GitHub staff, but some suspect it was because the code contained bad words and slurs. Do you know if this is why the project was banned, and will these new private team repos be subject to the same terms/rules?
◧◩◪
3. natfri+I9[view] [source] 2020-04-14 16:48:48
>>pubby+96
Private repos are not subject to our Community Guidelines on public content, so no, we don't enforce the same rules there: https://help.github.com/en/github/site-policy/github-communi...

I wasn't aware of SS13, and will look into what happened there. Content moderation at GitHub scale is hard and sometimes mistakes are made.

◧◩◪◨
4. yjftsj+Rc[view] [source] 2020-04-14 17:02:55
>>natfri+I9
> Content moderation at GitHub scale is hard and sometimes mistakes are made.

This is completely fair, but lack of transparency makes it significantly more frustrating.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. Gordon+Li[view] [source] 2020-04-14 17:28:45
>>yjftsj+Rc
Agree strongly with this. If a repo is public and gets banned, I think it's reasonable to expect that the community can know why, regardless of the rights or wrongs of the decision.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. zerkte+Kp[view] [source] 2020-04-14 17:59:34
>>Gordon+Li
It seems reasonable to expect this, but it can fall down in practice for several reasons:

* Sometimes legal counsel provide advice that there should be no further response to the individual or organization. Often technical people don't understand this situation, but it doesn't change the merits of the legal advice. In smaller organizations a leader might take a chance in further engagement, if they think it's helpful, but it's unlikely a large organization would expose themselves to this risk.

* Breakdown in internal response processes. You'll find that many people are really uncomfortable in these situations (e.g. compliance team shut down service, but don't "own" the response.) Unless the legal team has written a response and instructions on how to deliver it, you will often see people in organizations avoid giving the response. Things get passed down as low as they can go which doesn't help because there is less experience with handling tough situations. Very often some poor person with support ends up having to give the response and they basically ignore it because they can avoid the situation. This isn't very professional of the organization, but it's a reality.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. Gordon+Iv[view] [source] 2020-04-14 18:26:26
>>zerkte+Kp
This is a well thought out response with factors that weren't obvious to me - thanks.
[go to top]