this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2024
352 points (99.7% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

53939 readers
388 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-FiLiberapay


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bitwolf@lemmy.one 30 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Why TF would you put it on gitlab instead of hosting your own forejo instance?

I swear, some people are just too eager to get in headlines rather than thinking things through.

[–] Sauce@hexbear.net 34 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I wonder why they didn't selfhost GitLab. It and sourcehut are the ones that aren't ugly

[–] ReveredOxygen@sh.itjust.works 14 points 6 months ago (1 children)

if you put it on gitlab, you're not the one getting sued when they take it down

[–] bitwolf@lemmy.one 4 points 6 months ago

I am more saying it's not surprising Gitlab would take it down.

For example. With yt-dl /github they immediately went to a self hosted Gitlab instance. It wasn't simply a hasty move to the public Gitlab instance.

[–] caseyweederman@lemmy.ca 4 points 6 months ago

For all the free publicity when it gets taken down. They were probably hosting it six different ways already