[__jonas]

I would like some commentary from you, sounds very reasonable to me, I don't understand what the problem is.

Of course if you choose to share your project with others for collaboration, the content of that project is transmitted from your machine, what else would you expect? How would it work otherwise?

[makeitdouble]

I didn't get it at first, but as I read it the last "Zed" is not the editor but the company.

Basically the Zed company also gets access to the code you're sharing with other users.

[wrasee]

Exactly. So two people at work share a private session, then all user content of that session is directly accessible to Zed Industries.

Is that right? If I understand that correctly I think that’s going to be an instant no for a lot of people.

[jtsiskin]

A lot of people use hosted git solutions. And even hosted databases!

[nicce]

Someone might even know some unencrypted platform called as GitHub.

[wrasee]

I’d argue it’s not quite the same, since with hosted git you are being very explicit in both what you are sharing and who you are sharing with.

Neither of those things are the same here.

[nicce]

I misread the above comment it seems, however, my point was that for many it is not instant no, since so many buy space from GitHub et al. Probably most of the small companies.

They have already trust in place. Do they trust Zed too?

[dullcrisp]

In other words, “when you use our servers your data will be on our servers but we’ll only access it when we’re debugging our servers.”

[mountainriver]

“And improving our solution” so full access

[wrasee]

“And when we suffer a data breach (sorry about that)”.

[toastercat]

It'd be more appealing if user content was e2e encrypted during sessions.