• Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    I kind of agree with the Reddit post. Like how hard is it to just provide a simple download button? Obviously if it’s an open source project and still in development there’s not a lot of utility in doing that, but there are situations where there will be a plug-in for a program and it’s been distributed via github.

    And it’s got a terrible UI, I can never remember where the download zip button is, because it’s not obvious.

    • janAkali@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Github is not a software distribution platform, it was never meant to be one. It’s a developer platform for code distribution and collaboration. And UI is designed around that.

      A lot of projects use it as a distribution platform, but they’re wrong - it’s always better to have a web page with simple download button for casual “ordinary” people.

      But, this case is special: this mostly harmless tool is designed and almost exclusively used to stalk / doxx / hack people =|. So, it’s not in developers interest to make it widely available and easy to install.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        You’re full of contradictions. “It’s not a distribution platform it’s another kind of distribution platform.” Nevermind the fact that it has a “releases” feature designed to provide a somewhat easy way to distribute software however the dev wants to use it.

        Then “it’s a mostly harmless script designed to commit crimes.” Do you know what harmless means?

        • janAkali@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Sorry, I meant to write that Github is not a software distribution, but a code distribution platform.

          And ‘mostly harmless’ as in it’s not inherently malicious - you can use it for harmless stuff. It’s merely a tool.

          • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Also I don’t really follow how it makes sense that the UI should be bad if they only meant for it to be used with code. Developers are humans too, and the GitHub UI is not great. I use it all the time and still get confused by some of the dumb UI decisions they have made.

    • mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      You are arguing with elitism, it will never go anywhere and they will never feel ashamed.

      Honestly, 99% of the reason the world is still locked in closed source software ecosystems is that fucking elitist rectal-cranial inversionist devs that want to make it as hard as possible for a non-dev to use their tools.

      ‘You aren’t entitled to an easy install’ is the mantra they whisper in their hearts as they push code.

      • Whelks_chance@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        What? It’s python code, not in a binary, and you’re complaining about things being closed source?

        Also if you want it compiled and provided to you, feel free to pay someone to provide that service.

        The only barrier here is not wanting to pay AND not wanting to learn or read instructions.

        Life is going to be pretty tricky with that mentality.

        • mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          ^This attitude is exactly what crippled open source, good job playing into Apple and Microshit’s hands.

          The more effort a user has to put in to use a tool, especially when other, easier and functional tools exist, the less likely that user is going to adopt that tool as part of their daily use.

          The only barrier here is not wanting to pay AND not wanting to learn or read instructions.

          This is a false dichotomy, there are plenty of free and good open source tools that don’t need 20 hours of manual plundering to install.

          The Gimp is a great example of this, super easy to install right out the box for even non-technical people, is open source, doesn’t cost a cent.

          The simple truth is devs that share your attitude are too lazy to complete their projects so they get it to 80% and expect the end user to finish the rest.

          Do you think that is winning you any adherents? But please, keep proving my claims of linux elitism so blatantly, it makes my job so much easier.

          • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            You don’t know what you’re talking about, simple as.

            This is a python tool. It will never be compiled for you. Ever. It’s literally not compiled. Get over it.

            This post was perfectly made to trigger all the morons who don’t know the first thing about coding… getting upset you’re looking at source code… in a repository…

            If you’re upset at seeing source code, GET THE FUCK OUT OF THE REPO!!

          • cm0002@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            The Gimp is a great example of this, super easy to install right out the box for even non-technical people, is open source, doesn’t cost a cent.

            No, it’s not, GIMP has funding, resources and a fucking company behind it lmao and on top of that it’s intended to be an end-user tool

            Not all open source projects are the same, many are just things people work on in their free time and are kind enough to share, many aren’t intended (like this one) for end users at all. They’re meant for people who know what they’re doing (which it’s quite evident you don’t)

            If you want to know who is actually harming the open source community look in a mirror, it’s people like you who whine and bitch about “Meah InstAllers MeH uSEr ExpErIenCe” that makes devs not want to contribute

            • mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              No, it’s not, GIMP has funding,

              That contradicts zero statements I have made, it is still super easy to install, doesn’t cost the user a cent, and is open source.

              Maybe the world would be a better place of more open source projects had funding.

              that makes devs not want to contribute

              If money is so important to them then maybe they should choose not to be open source devs?

              If you cannot adhere to the philosophy then don’t complain when people call you out on it.

              it’s people like you

              It’s people like me that have chosen not to go the open source route due to the difficulty, that is our choice and is the worldwide average choice as hardly anyone ever bothers to deal with all the byzantine bullshit that arrogant elitists like yourself are just giddy over expressing.

              Open Source has failed its original goals due to elitist devs putting up artificial hurdles to general adoption, you don’t get to complain about adoption if you actively narrow your market segment to people who have the time and experience to fix your broken shit before they use it.

              • cm0002@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                9 months ago

                Lmao, just because something is open source doesn’t mean the devs are expecting a return. You talk about market segments, adoption rates and funding like that’s the only goal someone has for sharing their project

                You expect someone who put something on GitHub, for free, for everyone, worked on with their spare time because they had a passion for it to have it 100% ready to ship to production complete with an installer and a GUI? Nah, you’re the elitist asshole, you should order more than one mirror.

                That contradicts zero statements I have made, it is still super easy to install, doesn’t cost the user a cent, and is open source

                Yes it does, they have the funding and resources to pay someone to handle the easy installer and user experience, they have teams of people to handle the issues.

                If money is so important to them then maybe they should choose not to be open source devs?

                If you cannot adhere to the philosophy then don’t complain when people call you out on it.

                LMFAO it’s not about the money, it’s time and effort, for one or 2 people maintaining a project they shared and work on in their free time that’s in short supply.

                If you have your panties in such a twist over “User Experience” it’s open source, make your own damn contributions. Contribute an installer then, contribute some infrastructure for a website to have your fancy download button. You talk of open source philosophy, but then instead of contributing to making a project’s user experience better, you just bitch about it instead.

          • magic_lobster_party@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            It’s not about elitism. It’s because most developers don’t want to spend that time on the extra maintenance and QA to ensure it’s working flawlessly for the end user.

            Most FOSS are just things people initially wanted for themselves, so they developed it in their spare time. Then they thought it might be neat to share the code in case someone else might find use in it, so they uploaded their work to GitHub.

            If you want an exe you can always contribute to the project, or at least make a fork.

          • 520@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            This is not a standard tool. This is an offensive security (aka hacking tool).

            The hacking community does not want people like the one in the post.

              • 520@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                There is one core difference. In regular open source projects, lack of layman accessibility is considered a bug.

                For offensive security tools such as in OP’s post, it simply isn’t a consideration because the audience for these tools are not laymen, therefore they aren’t designed with laymen in mind.

                In fact there’s something of an incentive to keep laymen out because people just hitting random buttons without serious consideration of what they are doing can land people in jail.

                They’re designed with the offensive security community in mind, of which even the most rookie members think nothing of firing up terminal and entering some nifty commands.

                  • 520@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    Sherlock is an Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) tool. It is specifically made to gather information on a target, which is always step 1 of an attack.

                    We can agree to disagree on whether it constitutes an attack tool, however it is clearly made with red teamers in mind.

    • magic_lobster_party@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Because making proper executables working on all machines is just extra maintenance work. They probably just wanted to code something and share it to the world without that extra headache.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Unless you’re running it very low level code no it’s not.

        If it’s anything that is in c++ or java You’re basically making me copy paste your code into a compiler and then pressing compile the end result will be identical to the one you would have given me.

        • magic_lobster_party@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          It’s not if you want to compile for Windows, Linux and Mac at the same time, with x86, x64 and ARM support. Cross compiling can often be a big annoyance to set up.

          And this is a Python project. Making stand alone executables for Python projects is rare.