TODO: Important for me to rephrase the body of this PR to fully articulate my thoughts, so I can decide wether to merge this or not
In conversation with a lot of people, the project was
renamted from ipynb.pub to NotebookSharing.space,
with a focus on sharing notebooks with others - individual
or in a group - rather than publishing. The difference
has always seemed minor and cosmetic to me - but I think the
intent of the user needs to be considered. Sharing mostly
seems to be during collaboration, and as a quick 'look at this',
rather than something for perpetuity. The lack of any user
authentication adds to this - publication requires intent,
and control - and here we provide neither intentionally.
So the focus here is on in-progress work products rather
than 'final' work to be 'published'.
I've also been re-reading https://techautonomy.org, and found
it relevant. There's a general feeling of keeping the users
in control, and in this case the users are people who are
uploading notebooks. More specifically, there is
Protect people's privacy and other rights by design
'Other rights' include copyright too. Copyright has been
used to fuck over so many people over and over (hello, Oracle!).
But it feels important to me that users pick this license,
rather than have it thrust upon them - at this level, at least.
GitHub should pick a default license for repositories at creation
I think that's a good place for people to make an informed
choice about how they want their work to be used. Uploading
a single notebook doesn't seem to be such a place.
TODO: Important for me to rephrase the body of this PR to fully articulate my thoughts, so I can decide wether to merge this or not
In conversation with a lot of people, the project was renamted from ipynb.pub to NotebookSharing.space, with a focus on sharing notebooks with others - individual or in a group - rather than publishing. The difference has always seemed minor and cosmetic to me - but I think the intent of the user needs to be considered. Sharing mostly seems to be during collaboration, and as a quick 'look at this', rather than something for perpetuity. The lack of any user authentication adds to this - publication requires intent, and control - and here we provide neither intentionally. So the focus here is on in-progress work products rather than 'final' work to be 'published'.
I've also been re-reading https://techautonomy.org, and found it relevant. There's a general feeling of keeping the users in control, and in this case the users are people who are uploading notebooks. More specifically, there is
'Other rights' include copyright too. Copyright has been used to fuck over so many people over and over (hello, Oracle!). But it feels important to me that users pick this license, rather than have it thrust upon them - at this level, at least. GitHub should pick a default license for repositories at creation