16 ms·

Don't forget altruism, wanting as many as possible to benefit from a valuable project, making the world a better place in the process. Should it not be the cons

by capisce 14y ago

Don't forget altruism, wanting as many as possible to benefit from a valuable project, making the world a better place in the process. Should it not be the considered the best reason?

mseebach 14y ago
No, that's one of the great things about the FOSS community. There's very little value judgement - or rather, the sum of the movement is altruistic, even if the individual actions taken within it are egoistical. My software isn't "better" because I wrote it altruistically than if I wrote it for a million bucks and open sourced it so I could legally take advantage of other peoples code in it. Actually, the quintessential open source project is a developer scratching his own back. That's not particularly altruistic.
- capisce 14y ago
  > Actually, the quintessential open source project is a developer scratching his own back. That's not particularly altruistic. He wrote the software to scratch his own back, and now he needs a reason to release it as open source for others to use. My point was that altruism would be just a good (if not better) a reason to release it as any of the other reasons listed by btilly.
  - mseebach 14y ago
    In my book near-zero cost actions can't be meaningfully altruistic - in that case the term gets so watered down that it's essentially meaningless.
    - capisce 14y ago
      Altruism can be part of the reasons for writing new open source code too. For example in a specific case the set of reasons can be that it's fun, it's a learning experience, it markets the coder's skills, _and_ it provides free value to others. It doesn't have to be the only reason, and I'm not necessarily talking about "pure" altruism here (if there is such a thing), but rather about a general concern for the welfare of others.
doktrin 14y ago
I dislike this line of reasoning. It imposes a fairly unrealistic value system where none need exist. I quoted Linus elsewhere in this thread, but it's worth repeating at least once. I do not see open source as some big goody-goody "let's all sing kumbaya around the campfire and make the world a better place". No, open source only really works if everybody is contributing for their own selfish reasons. [1] [1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18419231 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18419231
- capisce 14y ago
  You dislike wanting to provide free value for others being part of the reason for writing / releasing open source software?
  - doktrin 14y ago
    I dislike ranking the motivations of others on some arbitrary scale. In this case, my comment was in direct response to your assertion about "altruism" being the "best" reason for OSS contribution.
- freshhawk 14y ago
  That's an outdated view of behaviour. Helping other people is itself a powerful motivator for most people, and gains valuable social capital and status as well. It has worked because everybody is contributing for their own reasons, both selfish and not. Personally I like this whole "civilization" concept, so far ranking altruistic motivations higher than selfish ones has turned out wonderfully. Things get ranked on arbitrary scales regardless, that's what people do.

by capisce 14y ago

Don't forget altruism, wanting as many as possible to benefit from a valuable project, making the world a better place in the process. Should it not be the considered the best reason?

mseebach 14y ago

No, that's one of the great things about the FOSS community. There's very little value judgement - or rather, the sum of the movement is altruistic, even if the individual actions taken within it are egoistical. My software isn't "better" because I wrote it altruistically than if I wrote it for a million bucks and open sourced it so I could legally take advantage of other peoples code in it. Actually, the quintessential open source project is a developer scratching his own back. That's not particularly altruistic.

capisce 14y ago
> Actually, the quintessential open source project is a developer scratching his own back. That's not particularly altruistic. He wrote the software to scratch his own back, and now he needs a reason to release it as open source for others to use. My point was that altruism would be just a good (if not better) a reason to release it as any of the other reasons listed by btilly.
- mseebach 14y ago
  In my book near-zero cost actions can't be meaningfully altruistic - in that case the term gets so watered down that it's essentially meaningless.
  - capisce 14y ago
    Altruism can be part of the reasons for writing new open source code too. For example in a specific case the set of reasons can be that it's fun, it's a learning experience, it markets the coder's skills, _and_ it provides free value to others. It doesn't have to be the only reason, and I'm not necessarily talking about "pure" altruism here (if there is such a thing), but rather about a general concern for the welfare of others.

doktrin 14y ago

I dislike this line of reasoning. It imposes a fairly unrealistic value system where none need exist. I quoted Linus elsewhere in this thread, but it's worth repeating at least once. I do not see open source as some big goody-goody "let's all sing kumbaya around the campfire and make the world a better place". No, open source only really works if everybody is contributing for their own selfish reasons. [1] [1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18419231 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18419231

capisce 14y ago
You dislike wanting to provide free value for others being part of the reason for writing / releasing open source software?
- doktrin 14y ago
  I dislike ranking the motivations of others on some arbitrary scale. In this case, my comment was in direct response to your assertion about "altruism" being the "best" reason for OSS contribution.
freshhawk 14y ago
That's an outdated view of behaviour. Helping other people is itself a powerful motivator for most people, and gains valuable social capital and status as well. It has worked because everybody is contributing for their own reasons, both selfish and not. Personally I like this whole "civilization" concept, so far ranking altruistic motivations higher than selfish ones has turned out wonderfully. Things get ranked on arbitrary scales regardless, that's what people do.