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. 2OEH8e+Ol[view] [source] 2020-04-14 17:43:59
>>yjftsj+Rc
Transparency can give bad actors a way to game and workaround the system.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. bhk+Fr[view] [source] 2020-04-14 18:07:55
>>2OEH8e+Ol
How is "game and workaround the system" different from "comply with policies"? Is compliance not the objective?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. pc86+RG[view] [source] 2020-04-14 19:20:20
>>bhk+Fr
Compliance with the spirit is the objective. Sometimes the spirit and the letter differ for any number of reasons (many of which are completely reasonable).

People tend to get pretty upset when someone is very clearly complying with the letter while flying in complete opposition to the spirit, and it's not always an easy fix.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. renata+dI[view] [source] 2020-04-14 19:28:09
>>pc86+RG
In that case, it sounds like the letter needs to be fixed. It's not fair to expect people to follow an ephemeral ideal of what the rules are rather than what they're told the rules actually are.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. search+gb2[view] [source] 2020-04-15 09:48:09
>>renata+dI
That sounds like it will lead to a lot more restrictions than there are today.
[go to top]