Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by skyde 2048 days ago
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
2 comments
zimbatm 2048 days ago
That's only true for high-profile projects.

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

link
dmix 2048 days ago
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.

link
wolfgke 2048 days ago
Is is good for name recognition if you contribute to software of somewhat dubious legal status such as youtube-dl?
link
sebastien_b 2048 days ago
“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)

link
mr_toad 2048 days ago
> Dubious legal status” defined by whom?

A potential employer.

link
sebastien_b 2048 days ago
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.

link
pmiller2 2048 days ago
Except that one of these is legal under federal (and most state) laws, and the other two are not.
link
wernercd 2048 days ago
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.

link
sebastien_b 2048 days ago
Show on the list where youtube-dl has been proven illegal.

Implying criminality because you're participating on something "of dubious legality" defined nebulously ("guilt by association") wouldn't play well.

link
arpa 2048 days ago
Youtube-dl has a lot of legal applications!
link
wolfgke 2048 days ago
Indeed it has. But the DMCA takeout request nevertheless shows that the legality of the youtube-dl itself is not clear.
link