[wolfgke]

If developers are afraid, they will be tempted to program a solution for censorship-resistant hosting of open source software that additionally allows to contribute anonymously (not just pseudonymously).

[skyde]

the problem is lot of the incentive to contribute for free is the name recognition. Lot of dev see it as a way to show what they can do (portfolio) because that can’t share the code they produce at work

[zimbatm]

That's only true for high-profile projects.

Projects like YouTube-dl are usually born out of passion, and the best kind of projects.

[dmix]

Yep, plenty of tools in the infosec world on github and elsewhere are published by anonymous developers.

Plus when you use an anonymous name and get a popular project out of it, you still get recognition. Even if it's not publicly in your name. You'll still feel good about contributing to the world.

[wolfgke]

Is is good for name recognition if you contribute to software of somewhat dubious legal status such as youtube-dl?

[sebastien_b]

“Dubious legal status” defined by whom?

All GitHub got was a take down request (which they were required to act on), not proof of anything being illegal (which requires a court case to prove)

[mr_toad]

> Dubious legal status” defined by whom?

A potential employer.

[sebastien_b]

A potential employer doing that will open themselves up to some serious legal problems.

"Oh, you committed code to a repo I consider dubious though nothing proven... hmmm not sure I'll hire you".

"Oh, you shop at a store run by a non-white person.... hmmm not sure I'll hire you".

"Oh, you follow a religion, but I'm atheist... hmmm not sure I'll hire you".

... the list goes on.

[pmiller2]

Except that one of these is legal under federal (and most state) laws, and the other two are not.

[wernercd]

Show where in the list of protected classes (race, sex, ethnicity, etc) "your choice of programming projects" is covered?

Two of those are protected classes... the third one isn't.

[arpa]

Youtube-dl has a lot of legal applications!

[wolfgke]

Indeed it has. But the DMCA takeout request nevertheless shows that the legality of the youtube-dl itself is not clear.

[kmeisthax]

Wait, that's just Git with extra steps

[wolfgke]

> Wait, that's just Git with extra steps

But the extra steps are not completely trivial to do right if strong anonymity has to be ensured.