20 ms·

Not getting paid for open source is how the world works. If you do any of the above you invite yourself to so much criticism that it's not worth it. I have fir

by ggame 10y ago

Not getting paid for open source is how the world works. If you do any of the above you invite yourself to so much criticism that it's not worth it. I have first hand experience of this. I hope to retire next year to do open source full time with money made from closed source. My audience will not be developers though; I'm soured on them. I'll be targeting a niche group who are actually grateful for free tools and don't feel like it's their life duty to criticize every small thing.

dyarosla 10y ago
There's a ton of cynicism here with very little substance. Perhaps over generalizing developers; many of whom do appreciate open source?
- toomuchtodo 10y ago
  You can't buy groceries or pay your mortgage with appreciation.
  - astrodust 10y ago
    Appreciation comes in many forms, like how many people have developed a new-found "appreciation" for the New York Times or the ACLU of late.
    - toomuchtodo 10y ago
      I think you're discounting donations to the ACLU that have only happened as of late because of an orange catalyst.
      - gkop 10y ago
        It seems like you two are saying the same thing.
        astrodust 10y ago
        Yeah: Sometimes it takes Agent Orange to strip away all the confusion and lay bare what the things worth protecting are.
astrodust 10y ago
> Not getting paid for open source is how the world works. That's how it used to work. That's 1990s thinking back when people would do these things purely out of love, and when those using it were hackers or ramen-noodel eating entrepreneurs. Now huge corporations are using open-source tools, and some huge corporations have been built with open-source tools. Where would Google be without Python? Where would Facebook be without PHP? Where would Twitter have gone without Ruby? That's why having an official method for giving back is important. Node has shown tremendous leadership here in setting up an NPM corporation (https://www.npmjs.com/about https://www.npmjs.com/about) that makes it easy for corporate concerns to donate without accounting concerns: Writing personal cheques to people to "donate" is out of the question. Giving to a foundation is noble. Paying for a support contract is reasonable. The difference might seem superficial, but it's important. > I'll be targeting a niche group who are actually grateful for free tools... There's nothing wrong with finding your own niche and doing it out of love and passion. That you're able to do this is great, but some need to concern themselves with how to make a stable, sustainable living that's not predicated on having a large amount of money saved up.
- ggame 10y ago
  Python, PHP, and Ruby are not great languages. Google, Facebook, and Twitter are successful inspite of them. I'm not saying open source is bad, I'm saying Dev culture in not paying for tools is bad. I agree that ideally it would be different. I speak from decades of experience doing Dev tools inc open source. All of my friends are practitioners in the space. We're all obsessed on how to get people to use better tools. It is something I've put a lot of thought into. I've personally spent over $200K on salaries for people to build open source tooling. If I could make a business out of it I would spend more. But I can't. I had to build an entirely separate company to make money. Edit (addendum): People who have paid $1500 for my software are grateful that I'll even talk to them; whereas open source freeloaders constantly demand I do more free work for them.
  - realharo 10y ago
    >I'm saying Dev culture in not paying for tools is bad. I don't know, JetBrains seems really popular to me. Off the top of my head, I know of a few commercial tools that seem to be doing ok? (judging by their continued existence), e.g. https://blackfire.io https://blackfire.io, http://undo.io http://undo.io, https://scrutinizer-ci.com https://scrutinizer-ci.com, etc. Of course, a non-open-source programming language doesn't stand a chance today because of the massive network effects required for success, but that seems natural (people want to use what they already know, what they know is often what they learned in school or on their side projects).
paulryanrogers 10y ago
"I hope to retire next year to do open source full time with money made from closed source." Sounds like pulling the ladder up afterward. Perhaps the niche you plan to target with FOSS would have supported a fresh graduate's new career. But your work may condition that market to expect it for free.
- pferde 10y ago
  So, he shouldn't do something he enjoys doing for free, because someone else somewhere might eventually want to make money off the same thing? That doesn't sound right.
  - paulryanrogers 10y ago
    Doing it is one thing. Distributing for free is taking it a step further. If enough people take those extra steps then eventually the value of programming as a skill is diminished for everyone.
    - pferde 10y ago
      I disagree. There will always be something extra someone needs programmed that they are willing to hire someone for. By the way, your argument attempts to invalidate vast majority of FOSS out there.

by ggame 10y ago

dyarosla 10y ago

There's a ton of cynicism here with very little substance. Perhaps over generalizing developers; many of whom do appreciate open source?

toomuchtodo 10y ago
You can't buy groceries or pay your mortgage with appreciation.
- astrodust 10y ago
  Appreciation comes in many forms, like how many people have developed a new-found "appreciation" for the New York Times or the ACLU of late.
  - toomuchtodo 10y ago
    I think you're discounting donations to the ACLU that have only happened as of late because of an orange catalyst.
    - gkop 10y ago
      It seems like you two are saying the same thing.
      - astrodust 10y ago
        Yeah: Sometimes it takes Agent Orange to strip away all the confusion and lay bare what the things worth protecting are.

astrodust 10y ago

> Not getting paid for open source is how the world works. That's how it used to work. That's 1990s thinking back when people would do these things purely out of love, and when those using it were hackers or ramen-noodel eating entrepreneurs. Now huge corporations are using open-source tools, and some huge corporations have been built with open-source tools. Where would Google be without Python? Where would Facebook be without PHP? Where would Twitter have gone without Ruby? That's why having an official method for giving back is important. Node has shown tremendous leadership here in setting up an NPM corporation (https://www.npmjs.com/about https://www.npmjs.com/about) that makes it easy for corporate concerns to donate without accounting concerns: Writing personal cheques to people to "donate" is out of the question. Giving to a foundation is noble. Paying for a support contract is reasonable. The difference might seem superficial, but it's important. > I'll be targeting a niche group who are actually grateful for free tools... There's nothing wrong with finding your own niche and doing it out of love and passion. That you're able to do this is great, but some need to concern themselves with how to make a stable, sustainable living that's not predicated on having a large amount of money saved up.

ggame 10y ago
Python, PHP, and Ruby are not great languages. Google, Facebook, and Twitter are successful inspite of them. I'm not saying open source is bad, I'm saying Dev culture in not paying for tools is bad. I agree that ideally it would be different. I speak from decades of experience doing Dev tools inc open source. All of my friends are practitioners in the space. We're all obsessed on how to get people to use better tools. It is something I've put a lot of thought into. I've personally spent over $200K on salaries for people to build open source tooling. If I could make a business out of it I would spend more. But I can't. I had to build an entirely separate company to make money. Edit (addendum): People who have paid $1500 for my software are grateful that I'll even talk to them; whereas open source freeloaders constantly demand I do more free work for them.
- realharo 10y ago
  >I'm saying Dev culture in not paying for tools is bad. I don't know, JetBrains seems really popular to me. Off the top of my head, I know of a few commercial tools that seem to be doing ok? (judging by their continued existence), e.g. https://blackfire.io https://blackfire.io, http://undo.io http://undo.io, https://scrutinizer-ci.com https://scrutinizer-ci.com, etc. Of course, a non-open-source programming language doesn't stand a chance today because of the massive network effects required for success, but that seems natural (people want to use what they already know, what they know is often what they learned in school or on their side projects).

paulryanrogers 10y ago

"I hope to retire next year to do open source full time with money made from closed source." Sounds like pulling the ladder up afterward. Perhaps the niche you plan to target with FOSS would have supported a fresh graduate's new career. But your work may condition that market to expect it for free.

pferde 10y ago
So, he shouldn't do something he enjoys doing for free, because someone else somewhere might eventually want to make money off the same thing? That doesn't sound right.
- paulryanrogers 10y ago
  Doing it is one thing. Distributing for free is taking it a step further. If enough people take those extra steps then eventually the value of programming as a skill is diminished for everyone.
  - pferde 10y ago
    I disagree. There will always be something extra someone needs programmed that they are willing to hire someone for. By the way, your argument attempts to invalidate vast majority of FOSS out there.