1792
Don't be that guy. (lemmy.world)
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by hperrin@lemmy.world to c/opensource@lemmy.ml

When you're talking to an open source dev, just remember that they are literally giving you their time for free, and they are people who don't like to be treated poorly.

Edit: Just to be clear, I don’t mean any ill will toward the guy. He’s frustrated and he’s just taking it out in the wrong venue at the wrong people, but that doesn’t mean he’s a bad person.

Edit 2: The reinstalling he’s talking about is NPM. So just running npm install. It’s because he tried removing the node_modules directory, which is a reasonable thing to do, but it means you need to reinstall the modules with that command.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] mastefetri@infosec.pub 73 points 5 months ago

It depends on if the first guy is complaining about having to reinstall this specific software, or if the software borked his entire system to the point that he has to reinstall his entire OS. Because that happened to me once. But in the first scenario he is being a dick, and in the second one not so much.

[-] hperrin@lemmy.world 76 points 5 months ago

In this case, in trying to resolve the issue, he deleted his node_modules directory. So he’s talking about having to reinstall everything by typing npm install and waiting for it to finish.

[-] FrostyCaveman@lemm.ee 34 points 5 months ago

oh man..

People can be such dicks, you have my sympathy.

I’ve been thinking about open sourcing a Node project of mine recently.. concerning that this is the kind of thing to expect

[-] hperrin@lemmy.world 31 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Well, this isn’t usual. This is actually really rare. Almost all of the interactions I have with users of my libraries are great. People are generally appreciative and kind, or at least not rude. This is an outlier, and I try not to let these things sour my experience.

He’s frustrated and he’s being abrasive because of that, but that doesn’t make him a bad person. I try to respond without being rude back, but just stern. Usually when you do that, people will either not respond again or apologize. I’ve never had a user keep being rude, and if I did, I would just ban them.

Sometimes people just kinda forget that on the internet they’re still talking to other real people, you know?

[-] boeman@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

You're lucky. I left FOSS dev because I got tired of my free time being abused by people like the one in your post

[-] dessalines@lemmy.ml 9 points 5 months ago

I've had to adopt a two strikes policy towards these aggressive trolls, who treat you like your their personal servant, especially since they make up like <1% of ppl on issue trackers. After a warning, if they don't play nice, then they're out.

It's the only way to keep the coding experience enjoyable, and not suffer from burnout.

[-] HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Wait till they realize that's literally the solution to a lot of Node related issues. It's in its own folder for a reason.

[-] appel@lemmy.ml 32 points 5 months ago

I disagree, in neither scenario the open source dev owes him anything. You get to use and modify the software for free, but the flip side is you are entitled to nothing.

[-] Raxiel@lemmy.world 27 points 5 months ago
[-] appel@lemmy.ml 7 points 5 months ago

Malware is not usually open source.

[-] robby@zoinks.one 6 points 5 months ago

@appel@lemmy.ml not open source is usually malware

[-] RovingFox@infosec.pub 12 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

You are entitled to the truth. If the dev knows their software could have very damaging effects then that should be front and center on the software page.

[-] appel@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago

Usually it is? But ultimately it's still your own responsibility. You did not pay the dev, the dev does not ask you to pay them, ergo the dev owes you diddly squad.

[-] RovingFox@infosec.pub 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Let's be decent with each other, I don't think my expectations are outrageous. I consider decent to make sure that the person that will use your software is aware of the dangers. And the best person to know those dangers is usually the dev.

load more comments (27 replies)
[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 5 points 5 months ago

No. It's provided without warranty nor guarantee that it'll work or even leave your system intact. That's the core of most opensource licenses. Dev owes nobody nothing.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[-] mastefetri@infosec.pub 4 points 5 months ago

I didn't say anyone owed anyone anything. I was saying one level of frustration was understandable, one was not. Anyhow, my case happened twenty years ago when creative commons barely existed.

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 1 points 5 months ago

Then you're right. The frustration would be understandable, the expression thereof towards the developer, not.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[-] laverabe@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

what's with the link in every comment? just curious

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 1 points 5 months ago

It's a non-commercial copyleft licence for the comment in case the case against Microsoft's CoPilot is won.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[-] laverabe@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

I don't quite understand, why would Microsoft sue you for a lemmy comment?

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 0 points 5 months ago

Just to be sure, is this a serious question or a troll?

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[-] laverabe@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

serious question... not everyone on Lemmy is a computer expert, lol

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

🙂 my bad

No, not sue me for lemmy comments. AI is trained with lots of data. The world wide web is full of publicly accessible data like our comments. However, not all publicly accessible data may be used without a license. Examples thereof are news paper articles, videos, still pictures, etc. Normally, if you want to use those commercially, consent has to be given by the license holder and a in some cases a fee has to be paid.

Microsoft Copilot is an AI model to help people write code. However, it was trained mostly on opensource code (code made publicly available) which was very often licensed. And it is done so in such a manner that commercial use is allowed with the obligation to make that commercial code publicly available too. Microsoft does not make the code for Copilot publicly accessible and uses code licensed in many, many other ways - and it does so without asking for consent.

This is often a double standard as companies that hide their code fight very hard to keep it secret and/or pursue those in court who do not get a license to use it. However, they will happily use licensed consent to their benefit without consent nor potential payment.

With some clever tricks, AIs have been duped into revealing their training data (often licensed, sometimes very private e.g addresses, birthday, health information, etc.). Lawsuits have ensued (against the AI owners like Microsoft) and are currently active with a pending verdict. Until the verdicts come, I add the license link to my comments. Who knows, maybe it will have an impact, maybe not.

Hopefully I could explain the situation in an understandable manner for you.

Have a good day.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[-] laverabe@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

I see - thanks for taking the time to explain the backstory, very interesting.

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 2 points 5 months ago

You're welcome. Thank you for reading :)

this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2024
1792 points (98.4% liked)

Open Source

28943 readers
222 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS