News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Monetizing open-source is problematic. Parent comment

Re:Monetizing open-source is problematic by hamburglar on Sunday May 23, 2021 @02:57PM (#27257551)
Is there some reason that, at least 13 hours later, the blog post hasn’t been replaced with a mea culpa for accusing these folks of something that ended up being a problem in your own library?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Monetizing open-source is problematic by pwdisswordfish8 on Monday May 24, 2021 @02:18PM (#27267840)
What power do you think the person you're responding to has over the content of the linked blog post? They're the link submitter, not the post author.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Monetizing open-source is problematic by hamburglar on Monday May 24, 2021 @03:22PM (#27268578)
Oh, damn. I thought I’d read further down the thread that they were one and the same but I see he specifically says otherwise. I guess it’s me that owes the mea culpa.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Monetizing open-source is problematic by jjeaff on Sunday May 23, 2021 @10:42PM (#27260634)
They still copied the fakercloud site, did they not?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Monetizing open-source is problematic by hamburglar on Monday May 24, 2021 @12:21AM (#27261063)
My understanding is they used faker.js to generate urls, and those urls referenced fakercloud. So the open source project faker.js ends up pointing you at fakercloud without realizing it.
[ Parent | on HN ]