Hacker News Reader

HN changed the title of this from the original question: “GitHub censors deepfake source code for non logged in users? (Try incognito)”

I have no opinion about whether or not that is a better title, but I thought it should be known that it was modified from its original.

View on HN

Good you mention it, because I did not understand intended meaning of current title ("Faceswap Github repo is public but requires a logged in user"). I scoured the README to see how they managed to restrict a standalone, offline piece of software. Turns out, it's Github who's restricting access.

While censorship may not be an appropriate word, this is weird. Why would Github do something like that, except to force people accessing the repo to leave a trail leading to their PII?

That's a fair point. I've modified it again to make it clearer that it's Github that did the restriction.

A moderator changed it because of the tendentious use of the word 'censors'. Initially we changed it to the title of this issue that addresses the topic: https://github.com/deepfakes/faceswap/issues/392, but it turns out that wording was a bit unclear, so we modified it to be clearer.

I like the latest title better than the one it was first changed to, thanks.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com