What vibes do you think I'm going off?
What I meant was that you read the comments, identified inconsistencies from your point of view, and then responded in a confrontational manner without including the whole context.
You do have some good points. But instead of opposing everything that has been said, you could have differentiated much better.
For example:
- Public repositories on github.com are definitely used for AI training
- Private repositories on github.com are suspected of being used for training
- Github Enterprise Cloud is probably contractually protected
- Github Enterprise Server is the most secure of all options due to contracts and self-hosting (and therefore the ~~only valid~~ best option for enterprises with proprietary code)
All of the responses are saying that Github reads all code.
The first comment explicitly mentions "hosted on GitHub", which at least excludes GitHub Enterprise Server, which is self-hosted.
The article is about an open source project that, by definition, uses public repositories.
Github public and Github enterprise are products of the same organisation.
Coming from someone who tells others that they first need to deal with "adult life", I find this statement surprising. I work for an international company and manage several Github orgas with hundreds of repos. Whether the code is stored on github.com or on our own Github Enterprise server is highly relevant and makes a huge difference.
And that is the statement where I have to say that we must agree to disagree. I would find it a shame if the Fediverse just became Reddit 2.0.
Self-hosted does not automatically mean on-prem. Most companies will not have their own server racks on site, but will either rent them or, most likely, use their own managed hyperscaler cloud. Github Enterprise Cloud, on the other hand, always runs on Azure and is managed by Microsoft.