18F's Micro-Purchase Experiment: Why I Bid $1 • Hacker News Board

Re: 18F's Micro-Purchase Experiment: Why I Bid $1

#31

Post by brownbat » Mon, Nov 16, 2015, 4:42 PM UTC

ksk wrote: post #20

Working for free is a luxury for the people not struggling to ends meet. "Oh, I already got paid elsewhere, but let me work for free and outbid others who are doing this as their primary job" is the unstated context and it feels a tad bit smug and elitist. Personally, I think that the goal should be to get paid while you work on open source. But, I know that its not an option for everyone. >I use open source technolo…

Switching contexts, you could say the same thing about garage bands.

"Why are these amateurs playing all these shows basically for free? They're stealing money from hardworking musicians!"

Some disciplines spark addicted, passionate individuals who get other benefits beyond the price. (In contrast, there aren't a lot of enthusiast janitors.) If you want to make a living and you opt to compete with abundance, you shouldn't be shocked when someone is willing to underbid.

Re: 18F's Micro-Purchase Experiment: Why I Bid $1

#32

Post by giaour » Mon, Nov 16, 2015, 4:46 PM UTC

x5n1 wrote: post #27

iaw wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a lot of crappy things that are 100% free market. Oligopolies come to mind. Just because it's a free market solution doesn't mitigate the negative experiences this person created for the other bidders.

Well the problem is self correcting. People will stop giving quality bids if they don't think that there is any profit to be made because a bunch of volunteers have destroyed the market. There is no problem here. Only that anyone bidding should be aware that they won't get properly compensated for their work and time.

Too bad we're all supposed to benefit from what this market produces.

Having worked in a government agency before, I guess I wouldn't be surprised to hear that a needed project would be delayed indefinitely while we waited for market dynamics to correct themselves.

Re: 18F's Micro-Purchase Experiment: Why I Bid $1

#33

Post by ksk » Mon, Nov 16, 2015, 4:46 PM UTC

brownbat wrote: post #31

ksk wrote: post #20

Working for free is a luxury for the people not struggling to ends meet. "Oh, I already got paid elsewhere, but let me work for free and outbid others who are doing this as their primary job" is the unstated context and it feels a tad bit smug and elitist. Personally, I think that the goal should be to get paid while you work on open source. But, I know that its not an option for everyone. >I use open source technolo…

Switching contexts, you could say the same thing about garage bands. "Why are these amateurs playing all these shows basically for free? They're stealing money from hardworking musicians!" Some disciplines spark addicted, passionate individuals who get other benefits beyond the price. (In contrast, there aren't a lot of enthusiast janitors.) If you want to make a living and you opt to compete with abundance, you shou…

>Switching contexts, you could say the same thing about garage bands

I don't know much about the music business, but as a layman, I don't think the two situations are comparable. I think that when a band releases free music they're thinking "I just need to put htis out for free and if my song goes viral THEN I'm going to get picked up by this huge record label, etc ,etc"

Its more of a "let me win the lottery" prayer, than any kind of volunteer type sentiment.

Re: 18F's Micro-Purchase Experiment: Why I Bid $1

#34

Post by Kiro » Mon, Nov 16, 2015, 4:46 PM UTC

This happens all the time with public procurements in Sweden. It's not uncommon to see negative bids as well. After you've got the contract you can bill them for service hours etc so it's a win anyway.

Re: 18F's Micro-Purchase Experiment: Why I Bid $1

#35

Post by Jtsummers » Mon, Nov 16, 2015, 4:52 PM UTC

ksk wrote: post #33

brownbat wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Switching contexts, you could say the same thing about garage bands. "Why are these amateurs playing all these shows basically for free? They're stealing money from hardworking musicians!" Some disciplines spark addicted, passionate individuals who get other benefits beyond the price. (In contrast, there aren't a lot of enthusiast janitors.) If you want to make a living and you opt to compete with abundance, you shou…

>Switching contexts, you could say the same thing about garage bands I don't know much about the music business, but as a layman, I don't think the two situations are comparable. I think that when a band releases free music they're thinking "I just need to put htis out for free and if my song goes viral THEN I'm going to get picked up by this huge record label, etc ,etc" Its more of a "let me win the lottery" prayer,…

I don't think GP was talking about releasing music for free. I think they were talking about bands that'll do a gig in a bar for $200 (or whatever's considered cheap) versus one that costs several times that, but is actually trying to make a living playing music.

Re: 18F's Micro-Purchase Experiment: Why I Bid $1

#36

Post by kbenson » Mon, Nov 16, 2015, 4:53 PM UTC

ksk wrote: post #30

kbenson wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and it feels a tad bit smug and elitist Saying that about someone who wants to help out so essentially volunteers their time to help a government project, which in essence means it helps everyone, seems a bit entitled and ill-informed. I'm sure many people want to get paid to work on open source, but it's a free market, and people will bid what they think a project is worth, and worth isn't always about monetary co…

>Complaining about this is essentially the same as complaining about soup-kitchen volunteers. No, it is not the same thing at all. People volunteer for organizations because the organizations DO NOT have the resources to pay them because all their money goes into buying goods and what not. When you bid $1 and work for free, you're saying I don't want the money you're willing to pay . To fail to understand this basic…

> No, it is not the same thing at all. People volunteer for organizations because the organizations DO NOT have the resources to pay them because all their money goes into buying goods and what not.

The organization does have enough money to pay some of them, but the savings from people volunteering goes to other resources, and since people align with the goal of the organization, they are fine with that.

This is the exact same. He liked the goal of the organization, he liked what they were doing, and he wanted to work with them, and he wanted to help out. Any money saved here isn't going to some CEO, this is the government, it's budgeted and if it doesn't go to another project here, it goes to some other service for the American people.

When you comp some or all of any expected monetary compensation, which is what this and all volunteer work is, you are helping to set the market rate for that job. The only reason volunteers in an industry can be unpaid is because the supply of people willing to work for no money outstrips the demand. If there were not enough people to volunteer in an area, the organization could and would pay some amount out of their operating fund to pay the work, if it was important to them. This would likely result in fewer workers, but it's obvious how this would work out. It's all supply and demand, even for volunteer work.

Re: 18F's Micro-Purchase Experiment: Why I Bid $1

#37

Post by brownbat » Mon, Nov 16, 2015, 4:53 PM UTC

ksk wrote: post #30

kbenson wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and it feels a tad bit smug and elitist Saying that about someone who wants to help out so essentially volunteers their time to help a government project, which in essence means it helps everyone, seems a bit entitled and ill-informed. I'm sure many people want to get paid to work on open source, but it's a free market, and people will bid what they think a project is worth, and worth isn't always about monetary co…

>Complaining about this is essentially the same as complaining about soup-kitchen volunteers. No, it is not the same thing at all. People volunteer for organizations because the organizations DO NOT have the resources to pay them because all their money goes into buying goods and what not. When you bid $1 and work for free, you're saying I don't want the money you're willing to pay . To fail to understand this basic…

> don't want the money you're willing to pay

You could run this same critique against any bid after the first bid, because it's lower than the amount they were willing to pay. The consequence of your argument is that all auctions are immoral.

In reality, prices are negotiated between a field of willing suppliers and purchasers. There will almost always be some "producer surplus," some amount producers get beyond their bedrock price, and some "consumer surplus," some amount consumers save over what they would have paid. It's just typical to find some middle ground in any transaction.

Here there was a middle ground, because $1 was not the only compensation, there were other personal benefits from taking on the work. It seems at the core you're saying he should have only valued money, that he should not have been allowed to "enjoy the work for other reasons" unless cash was involved, because some people prefer cash.

That doesn't seem like a sound ethical principle either.

> To fail to understand this basic difference is silly.

Also, maybe avoid dismissing other commenters as "silly." It's how these threads tend to slide off the rails.

EDIT: Warning - Sorry for some ninja edits, tried to expand my position. I didn't delete anything controversial, just added additional thoughts.

Re: 18F's Micro-Purchase Experiment: Why I Bid $1

#38

Post by ksk » Mon, Nov 16, 2015, 4:55 PM UTC

brownbat wrote: post #37

ksk wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Complaining about this is essentially the same as complaining about soup-kitchen volunteers. No, it is not the same thing at all. People volunteer for organizations because the organizations DO NOT have the resources to pay them because all their money goes into buying goods and what not. When you bid $1 and work for free, you're saying I don't want the money you're willing to pay . To fail to understand this basic…

> don't want the money you're willing to pay You could run this same critique against any bid after the first bid, because it's lower than the amount they were willing to pay. The consequence of your argument is that all auctions are immoral. In reality, prices are negotiated between a field of willing suppliers and purchasers. There will almost always be some "producer surplus," some amount producers get beyond thei…

No, you could not. I can do it cheaper is distinct from I can do it for free.

Re: 18F's Micro-Purchase Experiment: Why I Bid $1

#39

Post by dragontamer » Mon, Nov 16, 2015, 4:56 PM UTC

zeckalpha wrote: post #3

Given the tendency of HN toward libertarian and free market approaches, I've been consistently surprised at the suggestions being made around this. This is free markets gone right: A buyer and seller finding the most efficient price for each.

Agreed. There were a whole bunch of people who would have done the work for more money, but there was one volunteer who was willing to do it for free.

The market connected the man with free-time and an ideal vision, with a project that needed to get done.

Re: 18F's Micro-Purchase Experiment: Why I Bid $1

#40

Post by goorpyguy » Mon, Nov 16, 2015, 4:57 PM UTC

ksk wrote: post #33

brownbat wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Switching contexts, you could say the same thing about garage bands. "Why are these amateurs playing all these shows basically for free? They're stealing money from hardworking musicians!" Some disciplines spark addicted, passionate individuals who get other benefits beyond the price. (In contrast, there aren't a lot of enthusiast janitors.) If you want to make a living and you opt to compete with abundance, you shou…

>Switching contexts, you could say the same thing about garage bands I don't know much about the music business, but as a layman, I don't think the two situations are comparable. I think that when a band releases free music they're thinking "I just need to put htis out for free and if my song goes viral THEN I'm going to get picked up by this huge record label, etc ,etc" Its more of a "let me win the lottery" prayer,…

This is a good analogy, actually. You want a chance to do the work, and have people see your good work. You want that badly enough that you're willing to do the initial work for free.