News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Microsoft now credits maker of AppGet but offers no apology by viraptor on Monday June 01, 2020 @09:43AM (#23378323)
There's a difference between ethical and legal. You can do a lot of things that don't break any law but make you a terrible human being.

Of course you can copy someone's design and not acknowledge it unless it's patented. You're going to be a dick then, not a criminal.

Re:Microsoft now credits maker of AppGet but offers no apology by jdmichal on Monday June 01, 2020 @10:00AM (#23378500)
Is it really being a dick when someone explicitly, through choice of a license, allows it? What is this post from Microsoft except an explicit and public thank you? Which seems like it should certainly appease the "not a dick" criteria to me...
Re:Microsoft now credits maker of AppGet but offers no apology by fredophile on Monday June 01, 2020 @12:07PM (#23380019)
If that's all they did it wouldn't be so bad. However, they also discussed the project, future improvements, etc with the strong implication that they would hire him or pay for his work so far. This could have been well intentioned but you can't tell from the outside and people tend to default to assuming bad things about actions taken by large companies.
Re:Microsoft now credits maker of AppGet but offers no apology by beervirus on Monday June 01, 2020 @10:17AM (#23378703)
Microsoft isn’t a human being, terrible or otherwise.
Re:Microsoft now credits maker of AppGet but offers no apology by viraptor on Monday June 01, 2020 @04:43PM (#23383565)
The employee writing the announcement for the project is a person though. "Microsoft" hasn't done that.