I think the developer community should distance itself more from big companies that act badly.
One way to do this could be for open source authors to introduce a section in the README file expressing the wish that the software will not be used in ways the user is not aware of, such as user-tracking.
Thing is, when the company that pays you actively wants to track everyone, there's little you can do as the person that creates tech form them.
If the piece of software you created is unbiased and unopinionated, it can be used for evil purposes.
If you make the software deliberatedly against that, you have to (a) take measures without the company knowing (b) have the manpower to do it alone while still reaching development goals (c) those measures can be undone by another developer that cares less that you.
After all, software big enough is collective by nature. It's also unfair to us to think that we're responsible for any misuse as if we were mechanical engineers creating weapons for war
But please explain how publicly calling out and potentially doxxing developers would help this issue? Do you really want to target single developers and unleash the fury of the HN crown on them?
If we talk about morality and ethics, I think this is worse than implementing tracking, isn't it?
I know you guys wants to change the world and I absolutely agree that there are too many tracking in the world, but FFS, let's just take a step back and think about YOUR actions and their consequences.
Not everyone has the luxury to quit a job if they don't agree with the morality of their work. I know we are talking about OSS, but lot of the developers are living on the donations and sponsorships or even got bought out by larger companies and to keep their jobs, they have to do said implementations.
This assumes we developers have a choice. It goes down like this, product team says “we need to track”, dev says “but these people have asked not to be tracked”, product says “i don’t care, do it anyway” which leaves the developer with a choice, stick to their morals, quit their job and maybe go hungry, or write the code and keep eating. If people want developers to stand up for these types of things then we need protection too
That's not how the open-source movement works. You can't start excluding people based on usage you don't like. If you do that, you're explicitly not following open-source ideals.
I believe there should be more open communication and a record the public can fall back on while these developers make their improvements. Something in their face. Too many times did I track back and see unprofessional comments being made and things being done that seemed downright suspicious.
if it were up to me it would be alot harder to get a developers license and you would have to meet regulatory standards and have degrees to uphold your professionalism while acting as your own developer it seems to me that alot of developers have taken things into their own hands and are trying to make a quick buck any way they can get it. don't be surprised if you tell your mother or father or sibling to look at what licenses they have agreed to on their phones and they find alot of outdated unassigned licenses to back up their privacy. it seems to be an epidemic and how are we going to stop it?
I'm writing from the perspective of the user (which may be a developer using your product in their product). I don't really care if you view software as a knife or as a noose, I don't want to be coerced by the threat of either.
The solution to "software authors routinely collecting more info than they should" is not "accept the behavior as irredeemable, and just normalize it".
The answer is "make ot way more visible to users when it is done, snd make it harder for software authors to do/maintain." Anything else is just a tacit acknowledgement and grant of legitimacy to the behavior in question.
We can't just be consumers here, even though there is no money changing hands. This goes beyond the issue of trusting their code. We should send a clear message that 'dirty bits' are not welcome in community-built software. In effect, this is the only punishment you can dole out to an open source project--that is, choosing not to adopt it. Our 'ethics' as computer scientists are increasingly under fire and I think it's wise to know when to say 'no', especially when the hand that feeds is also the hand that beats you mercilessly.
I have a neutral opinion about this. If the software is good I will use it. If I get unjustified hate for reporting a bug I will consider stopping using it.
I do have an issue with someone who never ever contributed a line of code to a project create an issue to impose a set of rules. The default response for such “contributions” should be a fuck off response.
I'm still not sure what you suggest. Do you want to police the world of software, only allowing stuff to be released that has obvious use and limited negative effects? That won't really fly in a liberal society.. people will tinker unless you want to go the dystopian path.
I mean sure, you can nicely ask or try to shame people, but when did that ever do anything of note?
All other arguments aside, I’m uncomfortable with a world in which developers are bullied and intimidated by large corporations over nothing. In this case, it’s 3 month old api docs distributed to myself, which may be absurd enough to possibly make a stand over.
The central issue appears to be the idea that in order to defend against anyone, they have to defend against everyone. And in cases like this, I’m not sure that’s to the public benefit.
Citing a comment made by a lawyer several years ago. First ask oneself what situations you dont want to be in, and then prepare yourself for it.
Some people dont want to see their code being used in a context that might hurt a other human being, like spyware hidden inside a video player. Say someone modified VLC to produce a proprietary video player which included functions that spied on the users activities. As a developer, I would feel slightly at unease if I heard a Chinese citizen died because he watched a unpopular video, and the government found out because the program I wrote helped in spying and identifying that user.
Of course, that doesn't make producers of LGPL (or BSD/MIT) software evil or uncaring. Its up to each and every developer on how they view their work and its impact on society, and how far one want to go on that. Same goes for work, eating and spending habbits, money investments and so on.
One way to do this could be for open source authors to introduce a section in the README file expressing the wish that the software will not be used in ways the user is not aware of, such as user-tracking.
reply