Looks like he's just trying to shed some light on how bogus those activity graphs are (and also illustrating how easy it is to game them). The GitHub contributions graph probably shouldn't be used for any sort of meaningful measurement of skill, open source involvement, job candidacy—or anything else really. I found the two related articles linked in the readme really interesting:<p><a href="http://www.ashedryden.com/blog/the-ethics-of-unpaid-labor-and-the-oss-community" rel="nofollow">http://www.ashedryden.com/blog/the-ethics-of-unpaid-labor-an...</a><p><a href="https://blog.jcoglan.com/2013/11/15/why-github-is-not-your-cv/" rel="nofollow">https://blog.jcoglan.com/2013/11/15/why-github-is-not-your-c...</a><p>(Still reading the first one.)
Before I checked what it was, I checked the profile of the person behind it and saw that he had contributed to open source code for more than a year. I thought that was very cool and noble and continued to read the readme of the repository and found out that everything about the person's history is fake<p>So if your purpose was to make people believe that you're a good contributor and then realise you're just a liar who fake his contributions, you've done the right thing!