←back to thread

128 points darthShadow | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0.639s | source
Show context
concerndc1tizen ◴[] No.42812414[source]
If you don't like it, then why don't you use a different provider?

If you want free stuff, is your strategy to smear them into giving you more free stuff?

Storage, compute, and traffic, isn't free. You've been the beneficiary of charity for years.

Yes, the open source community has relied on this implicit charity as a parasite, by exploiting whatever free services they could. And now we're paying the price, as you say, by having DockerHub as the default provider.

My suggestion is therefore that we need independent solutions, that are fully funded as a charity, and stop relying on freemium services from corporations that fundamentally don't care about the public good.

replies(13): >>42812438 #>>42812465 #>>42812483 #>>42812503 #>>42812530 #>>42812541 #>>42812566 #>>42812595 #>>42812600 #>>42812673 #>>42812938 #>>42814023 #>>42816357 #
1. surgical_fire ◴[] No.42812503[source]
> the open source community has relied on this implicit charity as a parasite

Very loaded language you use, when, typically, commercial software relies on Open Source software and community efforts as a parasite.

replies(1): >>42812573 #
2. exe34 ◴[] No.42812573[source]
Projection allows one to set the frame of the debate, if you then accuse them of parasitism, it doesn't carry the same weight, as they've already used it against you.
replies(2): >>42812716 #>>42813111 #
3. plagiarist ◴[] No.42812716[source]
These Docker "parasites" are providing dozens of free containers for Docker's customers and still have the audacity to request an email correspondence about their sponsorship status.
4. surgical_fire ◴[] No.42813111[source]
Except I am not projecting anything, and I didn't accuse OP of being a parasite.

I am just describing a factual state of things of how companies relate to Open Source Software.