The EFF has been doing some good work on TOS abuse. https://www.eff.org/issues/terms-of-abuse
I'm sure they would be interested because this linking policy is absurd. There is no way a practice like this would be 'illegal' anywhere but on Apple's app store where I imagine Wolfram Alpha holds at least a little sway.
So Apple wants to block companies from allowing people to see content that wasn't paid for through their system. What's next, blocking paid websites?
Surely Amazon would just set up a website where users could access their Kindle books, bypassing the whole App Store problem. This is silly on Apple's part as it decreases the potential audience for their devices, and the ease of use.
Well, here's the beauty of Github--if they lose all my repos I just don't care. Since I've got a copy of my repos locally, there's absolutely nothing they can lose... Worse case if they go completely down for a couple days I can still collaborate using ssh or "git send-email".
This is the only reason I decided to use Github after avoiding Sourceforge and their ilk for the past decade and a half.
"This is the only reason I decided to use Github after avoiding Sourceforge and their ilk for the past decade and a half."
But why github? Why not gitorious.org?
If github goes away, I still have my code, but I lose any issues people have filed on the site, and I lose being able to easily check on forks of my projects where people might be doing interesting stuff.
I had been using gitorius.org, but moved to github for all the things other than git that makes one public git host different from another.
Right, and I should probably set up something to auto-snag that stuff where it counts, but having to do that is the sort of thing you have to so for any non-git-based site.
It'd be nice of all those related items were also in a repo, easy to pull.
Well, every resource is locally on some physical machine somewhere. I think his point is that Github is often treated by its users as a "local" resource, in that it takes the place of what would otherwise be a local server running a Git front end or repository.
Now, Github probably wouldn't encourage total reliance on their service. Git is fundamentally distributed, so this doesn't have to be a problem. Still, the Github service is an integral part of many developers' workflow, and I do agree with the above commenter that I'm not sold on the idea of trusting remote servers with integral steps in my workflow.
For open-projects, it's a FANTASTIC platform... no doubt about it.
For a corporate closed project, I honestly would not use github - not because of any feature or lack of them, but because it's a hosted service. I want control over where my code sits, period - if only for the same reason as most hosted services - a subpoena or similar court order can be served against the provider with no notification to the owner of the data. This is the #1 reason one should be careful basing one's business on hosted services.
The problem with this idea is that if a distinctly 'human behavior' can be calculated, it can be emulated. Also, it would require a lot of JS and other support that some people don't have. There's also the problem of false negatives when you consider auto-fillers that a lot of people use.
