The Dark Side of Open Source // What really happened to Faker.js?
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 05. 2024
- Yesterday, a popular open-source package, Faker.js, was abruptly taken down from GitHub. Its readme simply said “What really happened to Aaron Swartz?”. Let’s take a look at why Open Source Software can be a bad deal for many independent developers.
Note. This video was reuploaded after new information came to light.
#dev #opensource #history
🔗 Resources
github.com/marak/Faker.js/
docs.jstor.org/jstor-statement...
www.rollingstone.com/culture/...
nypost.com/2018/01/27/these-h...
📚 Chapters
00:00 Faker.js Disappeared
00:29 What happened to Aaron Swartz?
02:15 The Problem with Open Source
🔥 Get More Content - Upgrade to PRO
Upgrade to Fireship PRO at fireship.io/pro
Use code lORhwXd2 for 25% off your first payment.
🎨 My Editor Settings
- Atom One Dark
- vscode-icons
- Fira Code Font
🔖 Topics Covered
- Why Faker.js disappeared
- The Aaron Swartz story
- Why was Aaron Swartz arrested?
- What did Aaron Swartz create?
- Open Source Pitfalls
- Problems with Open Source - Věda a technologie
Well this is a first… The details surrounding this topic are way more bizarre than I expected, so I decided to reupload this video with some minor changes. Nobody forced me to do this, I have not been harmed. My mission is to teach programming and we don’t need distractions that could affect that. Also, sometimes I make jokes and for that I am deeply sorry. Remember to eat at McDonalds guys.
are you sure about that?
I've heard Popeyes has a better chicken sandwich
What really happened to Jeff 😏
Very sus
"Nobody forced me to do this, I have not been harmed." You know who says something like this? A person who was forced!
Not only the big greedy corporations exploit the open source projects. I used to work in a small company (less than 10 employees) that used different famous but niche open source projects making tons of modifications and actively refusing to submit them in the public repository. When asked why, the boss said to me that he didn't want to gift his work to "every Chinese kid with a computer". Apparently all the work gifted to him by the same "Chinese kids" wasn't concerning him...
You should've said that to him
@@jonaas Wouldn't be of any use, since the "Chinese kids" gave those codes out for free because they felt like it, while a company is, well, a company, that has to make money in order to continue existing at all. It sure sucks for the programmers, authors or artists, but no plaintiff = no judge, that's the companies' mindset.
Your boss was funny, not humble and dumb all at once haha
I don't understand this narrow POV, the boss had tbh.
Even if small businesses were somehow magically exempt from shady practices, they ultimately tend to either go out of business or become ever larger. Only supporting "small businesses" is better than nothing but it does little to change existing incentive structures and simply isn't an option for many desperate workers.
I remember the CEO of a large gaming company once whining that an opensource Clojure library that his whole company depended on went away because the developer stopped contributing so he had to get 200 programmers retrained on a new framework. And I was thinking, how about you pay that dev 1 person's salary to continue working on that project so you don't have to retrain 200 programmers. And this is just ONE company.
How about that one developer stop working for free? Your suggestion is of the same mindset as a homeless person sitting on a street corner next to a fast food restaurant with a "Now Hiring" sign in the window expecting them to come out and give him money just because they are successful and part of a giant chain of stores.
@Sn0w Controller Maybe the homeless man should have stopped working for free. Maybe the homeless man is homeless because he's an idiot.
@@lookupverazhou8599 you know what's a better analogy, big restaurant begging for the leftover sauce(his work) from the homeless man sitting outside their front door and refusing to share in the profits that they generate from the contribution of the very very good sauce
@@aravindpallippara1577 Ok, but if the homeless man decides to give up his special sauce for free, then he's an idiot, and doesn't deserve to share in any profits, especially since he's not interested in money since he works purely out of the kindness of his heart, and loves being homeless.
You see as a CEO he's got the "Sigma male responsibility" over his shoulders, so he has 2 options option N°1 retrain 200 devs, still pay 200 wages. N°2 pay for the maintenance of the package. Pay 201 wages. As a financial god as he is, he's not gonna pay in one more cent if it's not absolutely necessary. After all the wagies have to do whatever he demands.
Companies before the hiring procedures: We love open-source. We use open-source a lot and we're searching for passionate programmers!
Companies after the hiring: You won't work on open-source. You'll only work for us. Your open-source projects are ours.
There is plenty of companies who actively contribute to open source projects.
@@tophan5146 name 10
@@mushroomcrepes4780 Active open-source contributors 2021:
Microsoft - 4428 people,
Google - 4204,
Red Hat - 2865,
IBM - 1693,
Intel - 1573,
Amazon - 1316,
Facebook - 1053,
GitHub - 916,
SAP - 696,
VmWare - 650
Microsoft has 9,842,057 and Google has 9,832,261 commits to open-source GitHub repositories from 2011 to 2020.
@@tophan5146 try companies like "nestle" or "Total", or maybe airbus
@@tophan5146 steam too.
You should probabbly make a series talking about open source. Especially its dark side since we all know the good sides only.
Jeeeeez
That would be a very interesting series
Highlight topic: endless piles of issues closed prematurely.
Discredit the machine!!!
Complaining about something you get for free, without any warranty: check
Yesss
I hope you can make a video essay on the software licenses (GPL/MIT/Apache/Proprietary/etc), and the pros/cons of each and which to use for our projects.
definitely
++1
real men license everything under the "Unlicense"
Short answer: use GPL.
@@WofWca
GPL is almost totalitarian
On the original video a few comments had a good point: It is possible to get compensation from large companies by using licenses.
I think he tried that but some corporations already had his stuff and basically made their own libraries so that they wouldn't need his
If your license states that from the start and it's the best in the field, and is complex enough that a big corporation won't rather make their own rather than pay you, then yes, but it's also hard to enforce for internal testing tools that the public could never report on
not directly, mostly through consulting and tech support. Although I think this is more of lack of understanding how to monetize "free" stuff. I mean technically youtube is free, but it monetize via ad sense and your data, for the content creator, it offer membership, donation, referral link and tutorial. There is always a way to monetize free stuff. I mean mobile game has been doing for almost a decade now.
But lets for argument sake, some how big corporate agree to give royalty for usage. But in an open source project, every one contribute. Who should get paid for how much ? how do you measure who did what and relative to other people. For obvious repo like where 1 guy contribute 95% of the commit, sure it's easy to figure who should get the money. But large project where you have hundred of contributors who each did hundred and thousands of commit over time. What's the metric for who should get how much for each license usage ?
I mean unless this is some community base account that money get deposited into. And contributor make a request to spend on thing, and the community vote on whether this spending is justify for the community fund usage or now. Effectively you have to create some sort of judicial and ledger system to keep track of who should get that within this particular open source project eco-system. Almost like a mini-corporation.
@@keenheat3335 On the one hand you're right that there are ways to monetize free thing, but km the other you clearly haven't dealt with open source much if you're staying to hung up on how splitting funds works; it gets planned and managed by central authority, typically the original author, those who contribute volunteer their time. If they contribute enough they can be designated as part of the core team and receive a salary as an employee for the project
See "Big Time Public License 1.0.0" by Kyle E. Mitchell
If you want more details about Aaron Swartz, I recommend the "The Internet's Own Boy" documentary about his life.
Sweet, thanks!
Yeah, just watched it yesterday and it is pretty informative
thanks!
Thanks!
Watched yesterday and I was deeply moved. Thank you for the recommendation.
Can we get the change logs for the new video?
1) 1:41 about Ross Ulbricht; in the "original" video the label at the bottom read "(for drugs)" where it now reads "(for non-violent crimes)". 2) 2:31 this section about the current maintainer has been cut and replaced with him not going into details. 3) The last part 3:20 and after has had some minor changes which I don't precisely recall.
Someone will make a tool like 'diff' but for videos that show the differences in human readable format
@@fakeprofile6801 also the whole part about the suicides surrounding securedrop. The 4. Link in the video description still references this, in case anyone is interested
@@phil-jc8hp Yes you are right, missed the section about securedrop/deaddrop.
@@fakeprofile6801 I also remember seeing a photo of Jeffrey Epstein somewhere that's not there anymore.
man Aaron was a legend
It's really sad to see him pass away
Aaron would never pull the rug from under the federation project 😩
All that because of some overzealous humanities dope. Prosecutors and attorneys are like teachers pets with memorize the rules and are bullying the rest of the country with it. Such a pathetic profession
@@dislexas
Everyone who go against them
Suffer death
John mcaffee
, Aaron
, John Kennedy
Etc
@@davidthewise6617 i think government of america invloved in this somehow as because it is also loss for their own propaganda too. He was talented and more like too obedient to the world and people who had power are get jealousy of him.
@@davidthewise6617 mcaffee wasn't exactly a righteous guy.
What really happened to Fireship?
Traditional open source is incredibly important. I think the upshot of these sorts of disruptions is that those who rely on open source, which includes pretty much the whole world, needs to engage more. We need to provide both more funding for open source development and security, and also more attention to supply chain monitoring.
Just make everything pay-to-use. There, solved the funding problem.
Only things different from yesterday's deleted video imo are:
1:41 For non-violent crimes was originally something along the lines of For drug charges
2:07 Instead of this scene it was mentioned that another co-worker of Swartz committed suicide too
2:30 The "GitHub user" details were removed, I'm not sure why
Some parts were added at the ending too I think
Feds watching!
I do know that the github user that was mentioned did post the original video his twitter, so he didn't seem to have a problem with it... wonder why his alias was redacted from the video??
GitHub user didn’t turn out to be the damsel in distress he had appeared to be. Let’s just say his house burned down because explosives were built there.
@@Robay146 are those feds you mentioned in the room with us right now? God lefties on the internet are just as conspiratorial as Q believers
@@insertedgynamehere6487 interestingly, I had read the remark as humorous, rather than genuinely making the claim. Not that there’s enough info in the comment itself to know, of course. Expectation bias, eh?
This was actually a criticism I'd had of the open source community. Many in it, at least the less experienced ones, preach the virtues of open source and its selflessness, seemingly forgetting that programmers deserve to be compensated for their work. Sure, you can do that with a strong business strategy, but it's far easier to monetize closed-source software. Open source is amazing and provides a tools we use to create the best programs we can, but its not perfect.
Also I find it odd that someone so engrossed in the open-source development community would be so frustrated with large corporations using their software... to me, it feels like a day-one thing to understand and accept.
Same, I don't get it.
Well, maybe it's because some license terms are actively violated by companies. This I understand - it requires class action. But first of all, carefully carried provenance.
Donation-wise, I'd recommend to use fiscal platforms like OpenCollective to display expenses.
Make some piece open source and make another that opens money view on it (where it's necessary).
It's starving artist syndrome mixed with longterm corporate agiprop; where they want no gates put in the way of them being able to exploit and drain peoples passion while simultaneously being able to put up as many revenue generating gates as possible built on the backs of the unpaid.
@@TheNewton Regardless, a developer opening their work for free use has to make themselves aware that free genuinely means free.
I also would like to add that that is a relatively pessimistic view of business. While they are trying to save as much money as possible, just like us as individuals, most are not leeches eagerly searching for exposed skin to latch onto. Most companies are taking advantage of the free offer. With that said, there are obviously exceptions who do search for every single penny they can pinch, at any backs expense, who do things like underpay, overwork, and break contract/license.
Honestly, I don't see a huge issue. No developer spends tons of time building software for a project that doesn't pay anything while expecting to get paid. The only issue I see is if a company violates a software's license.
Couldn't agree more. Either make you api/service/code a paid thing or stfu when people use your free software for free. Of course it would be nice if people donate to show appreciation but by no means should anyone feel pressured to do so. Free means free. Otherwise just put the thing behind a pay wall are stop complaining.
If companies are breaking the license then that is a whole separate issue
1:42 "for nonviolent crimes"
Eh, highly debatable. Upon his arrest, Ross Ulbricht's DM's revealed that he had attempted to hire a hitman to eliminate a Silk Road scammer that was blackmailing him. There's a really good documentary on CZcams detailing the story.
Not debatable at all. Go put your mask back on.
@@ahahn928 "Ulbricht was indicted on charges of money laundering, computer hacking, conspiracy to traffic narcotics,[35][36] *and attempting to have six people killed* [37]"
U mean the ones where the FBI manipulated him into doing it ? Lol
@@LiEnby he still did it, and not just once. we can argue how much you can push a person into doing something all day and night but the fact remains that he hired them, routinely asked about their methods and status, and then was happy about it. doesnt get more clearcut than that
@@tanszism it was literally entrapment,,
I appreciate this trip load. I also thought the mentioned person was making some sort of political statement, and that could still be true. But after some digging, it appears the mentioned person may have some more personal issues. Major props for respecting this person’s privacy (and possibly mental health episode).
Huge respect for this guy. It's sad that so many devs are taken advantage of in such a brutal industry. Code should be open source almost always, that is the spirit and necessity of good programming, but there needs to be more effective ways to fund the people that keep our world working and improving.
I don't understand you communist programmers. You create the problem with your first statement, and then complain about the problem in your second statement. You want code to be open source, and you want people to be paid for it. You can't have both, unless you are talking about some kind of patronage. You can't force someone to be a patron. Or you could just stop giving away code for free. None of my code will ever be given away for free, except maybe if I become rich and can *afford* to work for free.
Why Jeff, there are about 5 minutes of deleted footage, can you tell us? There was nothing wrong with the older video. (*edit) sorry, my memory mixed up, it was about 4:09 minutes so about 20 seconds was cut. If you don't believe me, you can see the Wayback Machine.
FBI
is
watching
us
Could you perhaps elaborate on what the 5 minutes' footage was about?
Maybe highlight what you changed from the previous one in a pinned comment?
he removed the name of the developer who removed his work
@@MuhammadAlam-ne9cf Marak? Why would he do that? It's publicly available knowledge and considering the stunt he pulled he doesn't get anonymity
« uploaded by a GitHub user that I'm not gonna mention » Anonymization basically
Also changed the subtitle for Ross Ulbricht from Drugs to Non-violent crimes
@@NonameNoname-sl8tc Good spot.
I work for a pretty big company where we use a lot of open source code for our customers. The way I give back to these projects is by engaging and contributing to the project, I've also tried to make sure we donate and support the ones that want it.
I feel that's the least you can do to help the thousands of people spending their free time to make your day easier!
Oh interesting you took out the part relating to the other guy who commit suicide
and showed a picture of epstein
@@infiniti2011 oh really I didn't notice that
Aaron Swartz didn't create Reddit. He joined Reddit as the third founder but later the other founders boot him out because he's rarely there.
...rumors say that the FED reached to fireship yesterday, that's why Jeff edited the video
does FED mean the feds?
@@infiniti2011 everyone is afraid of inflation smh
@@johnsuckher3037 i was asking if by FED he meant feds
i just started your 100sec videos 30mins ago and was looking for other videos of you. and now I see that u just uploaded a new video :D
How weird, I was listening to an audiobook about this just last night, then this pops up. What you didn’t mention is that he didn’t actually distribute anything, they went after him for a life sentence for just downloading documents he actually had legal access to. Maybe he would have, which I support (look up where they source this data from, and how restricted it is, nobody wins but corporates), and this is another case of the justice system acting like civil terrorists. Btw, on my open source projects I have my own license that flat out lists companies and governments I don’t like by name and say they can’t use it. Try it. It’s satisfying.
Can i see your licence 😂😌
that isn't open source then, per the OSI, which rejected the Hippocratic License series for that reason
@@FourOf92000 yeah yeah. Same sort of people who say GNU isn't open source, it's all open to interpretation of the developer (I really don't recognise authority in open source so OSI doesn't mean anything to me). Thanks for your input though.
@@death-disco no, not the same sort of people, "open-source except for you" isn't open source, because you're still asserting copyright and defeating the purpose
@@FourOf92000 your logic applies to gpl. Every license except UNLICENSE falls to your little rules. You’re full of it.
now I'm more curious about faker than before. Looks like censoring it will make people want to know about it more
same
the guy was making a bomb in his house hence why his house burnt. Do not support the faker js guy. He lost access to his accs cause he got arrested for a bunch of crimes.
I'm rolling back to original version, git... meeeh
Fair code software model seems to help in this regard, it restricts commercialization of projects without consent or has set prerequisites that must be adhered to to use it commercially.
Jeff, it's not the dark side of OSS; It's about poor dependency management ("left pull problem"). In Go, we been through those hiccups in the past already. That's why we have "Athens" as primary and "Go vendor" as secondary/optional working side-by-side with our Go modules. You **MUST** always keep a copy of all dependencies in your full control to maintain reproducible builds.
OSS is about freedom, not about free beer. If you're referring to latter, you shouldn't be involved in OSS and instead work towards Open Core model.
Just saying.
Free software is about freedom, you've been coopted
The core of open core is OSS too. Just saying.
@@kphamcao No. Open core is not considered OSS. It's open for you see but you're restricted to license's commercial restrictions. That's why MongoDB new license got rejected.
Basically, if anything that is making money, you would not want to distribute it freely (I mean why would you?).
@@hollowaykeanho then does Elastic's previous Apache-2.0 licensed source code now considered open core. Not all open core projects use restrictive licenses.
@@kphamcao Then it goes down to releases. Releases under Apache2 (as in older and outdated versions) are OSS; otherwise, they're OC and you should read their legal fingerprints. That's why if the "bottom of your heart" motive is about money making, don't simply and blindly OSS your product at the first place because it can backfire front and back across its timeline (See: Franz vs Ferdi).
Don't confuse OCS with OSS. The former will get into commercial Disney level legal fires really quick and easy. The latter at worst is forcing you to upstream your codes if you made a bad choice.
Maybe Jeff can collaborate with LegalEagle team this year and talks more about this topic. I'm VERY sure everyone will benefit from Fireship community.
and he's most likely need funding for consulting a lawyer; OR maybe they team up and sell a legal course =.=".
That's why Linus torvalds was right when he said that open source licences are not for public but for Big tech. He rightly blames FSF for doing such a bad thing when it comes to GPL V3.
His arguments against GPL v3 were exactly the opposite, he precisely criticized the fact that big tech companies have fewer opportunities to factually close off the software by putting critical parts into proprietary hardware. The usually cited example is TiVo running GPL software that you can't modify since it needs to be signed by TiVo. The sole benefactor here is the big tech company. They decide when the hardware your purchased is obsolete, for the user/customer this is only disadvantageous.
I completely understand the emotions of Faker.js's author. Imagine you create a library that Facebook, Amazon, or Google uses everyday to make billions while you are for example struggling for a decent quality life at home, or you don't even get any recognition! It's like somebody pooping from standing on your shoulders.
Not sure mentioning you won't share the Github username really does anything. It's still a prefix in the npm listing and all sorts of other places. Not to mention just searching for the library would pull up the repo which would then show the username (just like in some of the screenshots)
not to mention he literally shows at the end the username in the npm repo 😭😭😭
I don't see why this is a problem
There were other changes as well. That I don't want to mention cause that's Jeffs decision 🤷🏻♂️ 🌹
@Liam Not a problem. I'm just trying to figure out why a repost with that information removed was necessary. Seems like time better spent elsewhere but as @Basarat mentioned, there are probably other changes that I missed as well. Rewatching, I think he also added a snippet on how other projects are changing their licenses as a sort of solution so I think of that as value added in this upload.
@@CalebBraaten Correct me of I'm wrong, but I think that in the other video he said that the person in cause was going broke
What was the new information that caused you to reupload?
The only difference I noticed was the maintainer not being mentioned by name.
He does not mention the name of the github User at 02:32
he added about mongodb and eclectic search changing licence and aws forking it 3:27
About the guys who commited suicide, it's the only diff I see
He cut a lengthy discussion about the current maintainer of Faker.js where the maintainer was stuck without any money and with a burned down house because people just used his code (an extremely popular library with many users and stars) without giving anything back to the project and that this is not a sustainable way to develop software.
Such a shame to lose such a legend just because he wanted to do good but the American "justice" system was up to no good. The people that led to his untimely demise should feel ashamed, if not testify in court.
To make an example of Aaron after JSTOR, not even a gov't institution, didn't want to press charges, was beyond petty. Probably some political move that cost him his life. Makes me sick.
@@vulpixelful you should learn the difference between civil and criminal law
@@winnerwinnerporkbellydinner You should learn about the constitution's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments.
Sucks u had to re-upload this. Adds mystery to this great video.
I'm really grateful to these developers for making these so much useful projects for us. I see a lot of packages when I install ask for a support in terms of funds, makes me really sad. Unfortunately I'm not in that position when my skills can pay me so that I can do a little contribution towards these awesome guys. May be they should use a filter so that if a company is using the library then it's charged but not for individual users.
Thank you for exposing Aarons story a bit more, I know most people here probably know about it, but it shows where power lies and what power will do to keep power.
Or just some attorney who wanted themselves to be the great guy who won this important case that would serve as a basis for similar cases in the future, perhaps? I'm not sure if the copyright thing even was part of the case but if it was I'd assume one could have considerable interest in being the one to lock him up, given how widespread and monetarily impactful digital piracy is.
Thank you for reporting on the original story and video. Props to you for circling back to put the message out again.
Thank you for updating this video. I feel it’s important to let everyone know, please do not support the author financially - he purposefully obscured the circumstances of how he lost his apartment, and given his current conspiracy-ridden and emotional state I am afraid of what he would do with a sudden influx of cash.
Dark side of the ring
and
Dark side of open source
I feel like the latter needs to become a series like the first. Important topics can be covered in a series like this and unearth some very important information or lead to some potentially large scale effects. Just my two cents though.
Interesting video, I definitely agree with you... OSS is used by many big companies and they don't contribute back or credit project maintainers. However, this is the way open source is structured and it's been this way for years. Linux and other large projects have made OSS a reality and its definitely not going away. And whether big tech companies like or not they cannot ignore open source. It is something that's become big overtime and just like anything else, there are downsides/drawbacks, but the concept itself is what compels others to use it.
Again, great video. Look forward to seeing more content from you.
I think about this often. Off the top of my head, the solution is to take the modern freemium model and adapt it. Something like; this is free for the first 1M uses/users, but above that you enter licensing. The openness and prevalence is what shoots it to fame (having community and docs), which is great, but once money (value) is being created, it's time to split that up a little.
In an imaginary world, it would be nice if there was just a tariff/tax, where whatever your net profits are get divided up and a portion will always be split amongst all of the software that makes your work possible. That seems most fair, and how we emulate a system like that I'm not sure.
This is similar to shareware of yesteryear ;)
That’s exactly what Docker is doing
Thank you for sharing this🙏 I did not knew this. Would love to learn more on this subject.
So many conspiracies in the open source it's like playing a ctf lol
Could you give me a few examples of those?
@@bossdaily5575 nice try NSA
I am a programmer not a NSA agent. I enjoy programming with 1s and 0s
@@bossdaily5575 I, too, partake in normal human activities like inhaling oxygen and consuming dihydrogen monoxide
@@okie9025 looool
This was epic. PLEASE do more of these type of stories.
It is simple: you code the enterprise code for the money and you code the opensource for your soul. And some people have sold their souls.
Hey man I was one of the whiny comments last video. Really appreciate you taking the time to rectify.
Problem is the greed of the big companies has had a profound effect on the entire world. Now it's ruining one of the best things that attracted me to programming in the first place, the fact that people were so helpful in creating open source code for me to use when I was learning. This sucks.
Onen source is now stronger than ever. Don’t be dramatic.
The faker.js dev: "I filed my code under an Open Source Free-as-in-Freedom License, but now I'm angry because an entity I don't like is exercising the Freedom I granted them."
If I'm not wrong, faker.js was MIT licensed (permissive license). It wasn't licensed under a Free-as-in-Freedom license (GPL or any other GPL type copyleft license). So put your blame on the author using a cuck license, not on GPL. Corporations usually avoid using copy left licenses, especially GPL.
LOL😂😂😂
Love your work Jeff and Fireship Pro subscriber because of it but I want to say you just caused the Streisand Effect by censoring your video how you did. I’m not saying that wasn’t the best call to make but you’ve definitely drawn a lot more attention to the omitted parts. I watched the original one and I think you should have left the majority of that footage but revised it with your current understanding of the situation. I understand if you’re trying to avoid defamation/libel but if he’s convicted you won’t face that issue. At the moment we’re in the dark and not sure what to believe - I guess I’m having to go with the other commenters and assume Marak’s just a shitty guy.
I think I watched this one yesterday... Deja Vu?
title: REFACTOR
Five (5) minutes deleted. That's about 60% of the video that the Feds forced Fireship to remove.
This issue is so rampant now that some big vulnerabilities are emerging for fortune 500 companies, because the repo is no longer maintained, and developers have gone cold turkey. Its sad that companies like Microsoft ( all others) who don't batter an eyelid to buy a gaming company for 65 billion never both to pay the these developer anything while using their code. The adge remains true, if you are good at something never do it for free !
Please make a correction (if possible) to clarify that MongoDB and ElasticSearch are no longer available under an open source license (the new license is not "a different open source license", it is not open source).
Great video! What license type were you talking about at the end making it harder for big companies to make paid versions of the product?
GPL license
I work for a company as the main dev.
We use open source code/libraries.
We contribute bug reports and provide our internal fixes whenever possible, it's not uncommon for later updates to include improved fixes.
Whatever small package that does not include trade secrets or value added piece of code, we publish opensource.
We use licenses (MIT or custom) to segregate code that we let anyone reuse commercially and that we restrict to personal use.
Our time invested publishing and communicating with the authors or maintainers of OSS has given us results manifold. Most common example is to have one staff spend ca 2 hours building a replication scenario for an issue, writing a clear and comprehensive bug report, and setting up a hot fix branch/PR, which results in 3-4 maintainers/users looking into the issue for hours, figuring a proper fix, testing the fix and releasing an update, at no additional cost for us.
I don't understand why bigger corporations do not see the value in that nor consider providing financial support to libraries upon which they rely.
At least he did a major version bump instead of a minor or a patch, so it didn't break all the pipelines that are currently pinned to v5.
Technically speaking, it _was_ an API breaking change…
The new JavaScript , rust framework Tauri is awesome deserves a 100sec intro
Lars Ulbricht ordered hits on people, I don't understand how you redid the video, but kept his weird mention in it.
In re-upload removed some content and added something else. Both are very insightful 🔥
Hello sir , please can you tell me that fireship quizzes is your application ?
If it's yours please can u tell me which language you are using ?
Blink twice if you're being held hostage
The maker of the repo can still be seen at 0:20
Lol
Open source community is like a family of developers they work together, they enjoy together and give product that is beyond the capability of any company while cooperates never miss a chance to steal their work
It would really good if someday someone finally stands against it and spread the value of open softwares
This is a good chance to discuss the 3 major types of Open Source licenses: MIT, Apache, and GNU license. Look it up if you want to protect your code.
I don't like GPL. Their Freedom is not real Freedom.
Didn’t Ross Ulbricth approve of executing someone, even though it was staged? This as per the Wired article
Yeah, the dude got scammed out of millions in bitcoin and in the process tried to have like 4 people killed. Barely Sociable has a really good video on it and all of Ross's chat logs.
What really happened with Jeff Delaney?
Thank you for highlighting this 🙏
Hey man, I catch your videos here and there when I can, and just want to say thanks as well
as you have an interesting talent to be able to drop it like it's hot EVERY time you send it; in
many cases I have been lead down a stronger path because of what I have taken from your
show. As I am approaching an actual title in this field of technology, (like a number at the
drive-up macDs)
I have always been weary and frankly confused about this 'open source' idea. I am
not quite sure why it was ever created as a thing. Granted when I 'open source' a welding
technique I am physically showing the individual, and they learn from it or what have
yAAAA; thus the Yeee-ole-HAMMYDOWN ideology that I would naturally be accustomed to.
With software code, I personally take pride in the projects like a calculator(yea, yea, I'm proud of that some beech though, and while I work on stuff for web3 presently, that was the first project I did without using anyone's code and hardly any ideas, I just worked it through over some days while it rendered me with an inability to sleep while I figured each part of it out and it led to weighing sincerely heavy on me. Why in the world would I share that code even? I don't care if someone wants to work on it and do their thing, but I won't ever be sharing any part of the success I reap from the extremely hard, self-motivated trial in and tribulation out section of my without absolute compensation for it. There will be no repos available. That's like any skill out there just giving away instruction manuals to an absolute decimal level of how to perform their trade in the working class. This is not how the world functions. The need for people to push all the projects out has led to an unbelievable amount of filthy, garbage half done pushed projects, virus infested, scammy, low-grade, mockery of this field available to anybody and everybody that can connect; or actually; for someone else to know a device owner would be in available areas so they could just go ahead and do that connection bit for them. FREE of charge too. The freedom of information thing is another long story as it relates heavily to what I am talking about, but there is differences in that I don't believe clear and obvious information should be in some peoples hands while they publicly exploit the diamonds from it while considering nothing but the greed and whatever the dbags feel when they feel better than others. If they went on a 4 year adventure to get this information over many hills and under many vern, then they would be entitled, in my opinion, to have the diamonds on display as they earned it. Life is about earning wtf you have and will get, as well as helping others follow down the path, but not by uploading the literal years of your knowledge to be had by any soul alive(it's laughable) and not about taking from others cheating yourself and future stakeholders with your real lack of knowledge. That's just stupid shit. It's far from greedy to demand compensation for your professional work and ideocracy to be sharing it as it is.Consmers do not need access to developer code in any case what so ever. Anything they need can be made available to them. It's not like you can go on Stack Overflow and make nice with any of them old pricks, so my idea rests at this whole open source bit was originated as a mutual back scratching for the lazy or incapable developers. Opposed to wielding a stinger n BigDogs rod, a developer (one from stackoverGayBoys) would be holding a rubber chicken, some of mom's meatloaf on the lap and a nudey magazine with those 60 pound bullet proof windows resting on their wet greasy ass nose. (just a quick bash to the strange hurtful fellers from that platform). While I do find it unpleasant as far as a social ground goes, it is exactly and the only thing developers in training should have at their disposal to figure this trade out themselves. If people want to just be crafty, then can figure it out or not, fuck being nice about it in that manner. Be nice to your dog and mom and kids teacher n shit, not someone who is blatantly robbing you of your extremely long hours and sincere efforts. The world in no way shape or form needs these useless massses of repetitve garbage clogging up the atmosphere to make their 15 hundred bucks and that be the end of that story, yet the shit wanders around and gets used for alternative purposes by even dumber low lives than ole billy bob that never did learn how to dispose of his code because he just wanted to earn that buck from ya. IDK, apparrently I find interest in this topic or it's just getting as obviously bad as the fake news today that it's just starting to piss me off; hard tellin. Cheers brother, I'll just tuck this in here.
Aaron Schwartz did not kill himself.
1:42 Yeah, I suppose taking out a hit is technically a non-violent crime given you're not the one physically doing the violence.
Wasn't this vid already posted ?
End game: What happened to the original video ?
Oh, the guy that was planning on making bombs in his apartment and got arrested after he accidentally set the apartment on fire? Yeah, don't give money to that guy...
any source where i can find how to attribute from open source?
Totally agree, there should be a license that allows for competition while they charge medium to big corporations making money off of it without contributing. Like a tier-ed license.
The moral of the story is do not upset the people with the big balls!
Ulbricht solicited hit men and paid them. He's hardly an angel.
I LOST it at Bill Hicks... Hahaha - great video bud!
Wait wasn't this yesterday's video?
What was changed in this re-upload? :)
Some personal information hasn't been used here
czcams.com/video/jCRAgy_MT2Y/video.html&ab_channel
Who makes something open source (free) then gets upset when they aren't raking in six figures? If you don't want to maintain a package, don't maintain it. Tell your users to fork it and maintain it. If you want to get paid, then sell it as a product. What is so difficult about that?
A mind shift in big companies is required to make open source work. If only they would donate a little bit to the packages they use, it would make so many big and great projects maintained and patiened people could follow what they once started.
Open source contributors getting angry over this reminds me of people who fall in love with someone by themselves, do stuff for that person, sacrifice and so on and when gets angry why they are not giving the love back. Even though no-one asked for it.
It's a bit tragic, but is completely fair and nothing really to get angry about.
Do not go to open source expecting that you'll compensated by someone for your work. It's as simple as that.
Likewise people are free to stop maintaining their stuff at any point too. No-one binds you legally to continue either.
Organizations like wise should evaluate their 3rd party dependencies more carefully. Fine working ones do.
And while Faker was a big project if we take into account how many orgs used it. Individually from org perspective it's a slight convenience and not all too valuable.
Some open source projects do get funded when they are. For example, Rust programming language is open source project. Or Svelte with Vercel. We can name a lot of them.
So nah, don't see any problem, just immaturity.
The difference with Open Source (vs. Proprietary) is that others had copies of the previous version of the repo, so were able to restore it. Again and again, with proprietary solutions, companies go out of business, and products die with no possibility of support or e.g. Apple buys out Camel or Darksky and then terminates the products, or Google does similar. Products dying is not peculiar to Open Source. At least with Open Source there is the possibility of somebody with the expertise being able to pick up the baton.
Awesome commit message 🔥
We need a longer video on this topic
Bitcoin maybe not in particular but some alternative to it.
Edit: By the way, nice video about part of history. You should definitely do it more often.
Aaron didn't kill himself.
seems weird to include the guy who hired a hit-man as an example of the gov't trying to make an example of people but ok...
Wasn't this video posted yesterday?
I think that is the same problem general science (like physics, chemistry, biology, even sociology, design, engineering and so on) face since the start of the industrial revolution. Most people that create knowledge, crafts and art are very open about having their work used and copied/reproduced. From a philosophical and scientific point of view the whole idea behind "copyright" and "patents" is a convoluted nonsense. It just makes sense as a kind of legal "fence" or "wall" that stops other people from making money out of a specific knowledge. And again, your specific "discovery" or "breakthrough" is based on centuries of free research made by other people. I still think that open source, creative commons and other initiatives that go the same way are very important and good. But finding ways to fund and secure both creators and their creation is the next step the community has to take.
The feds have reached Fireship fuckkk
How an entire work versioned with git on a github repo, can be wiped in a single 'endgame' commit?
How did he wiped out the entire version history?
Removed the entire '.git' folder, empty everything, and 'git push force'?
How to wipe out your repo?
And how not to accidentally wipe out your repo?
Keyword: force push. You could init empty git repo, and force push to some remote repo
@@KebabuTurka69 reflog
The Internet's own boy, whenever someone mentions public access or open source i remember his contribution
Fireship, thank you. Excellent video.
The other part of the story is: Faker had a server component which cost money to operate that wasn’t clear in the library documentation, so of course due to popularity the server component became too expensive to run & the author k/o’d the product. Should have either removed the server component or turned it into a paid service.
Note to all: If you release open-source software, use it to boost your career opportunities but don’t expect money.
Kinda sad that he removed the information from the original video. It paints a much clearer picture.
no it doesn't. it paints a probable bad person as a damsel in distress with old tweets
@@zheil9152 well obviously he could of been a asshole or a hero. But including the original info helps more then not including it at all.
The irony of talking about censorship being bad and then censroigng your own videos. :d
@@LiEnby Yeah lol "minor changes"
Great that you mentioned Aaron and Ross!
Re-upload?
The Mysterious Suicide of several infamous open source developers removed？Good, bad and ugly sides of open source devs need no hiding. Agree？
Self-censorship and Cancel culture are growing strong each and every days.