41–50 of 107 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think of HN like a product meant to make money though, more like a big ad for YC
> more like a big ad for YC That is dumbing HN down a lot. This community is much more than that: hackers share cool articles, have vibrant discussions and the comments section is probably the least toxic of all comments sections. YC related posts are very popular and YC itself is promoted heavily, but the community is much more than just YC.
The term "free software" is used rather ambiguously in the article. The free software that is referred to in the article is free as in beer. The more commonly used meaning of the word (among hackers) implies free as in freedom. If you want to learn more refer here https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems like the author is indeed referring to Free Software, but then makes a comparison to free-as-in-beer web services.
I disagree: it seems like the author is completely unaware of the "free-as-in-freedom" definition, and all usages of "free software" refer to free-as-in-beer web services.
Look in the third paragraph from the end:
> I love free software and could not have built my site without it. But free web services are not like free software. If your free software project suddenly gets popular, you gain resources: testers, developers and people willing to pitch in. If your free website takes off, you lose resources. Your time is spent firefighting and your money all goes to the nice people at Linode.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems like the author is indeed referring to Free Software, but then makes a comparison to free-as-in-beer web services.
I disagree: it seems like the author is completely unaware of the "free-as-in-freedom" definition, and all usages of "free software" refer to free-as-in-beer web services.
These arguments fall apart when you're living in a country with no access to online, international payment methods. And I realize that you don't want to bother with people that are not currently potential customers, but I'm just saying that you're locking entire countries out.
Could Bitcoin solve this?
But it is still a gray area, as it could be classified as foreign currency.
This is why web services should be open source and available for self hosting: - The geeks with the know-how to run a Web server benefit from your product for free, but in exchange you get bug reports, patches, etc. - Everyone else pays, because you also offer a paid hosting option. But because the product is fundamentally open source and federated, it can and hopefully will outlive its original developer.
My experience running a project/company like you describe: 1) Not the geeks, but the big multinational companies with disposable developer time end up using your open-source solution. Exactly the types of users I don't feel sorry for and would rather extract money from. 2) The "payback" in the form of bug reports and patches is negligible, because nobody likes to do work if they're not being compensated (either throu…
I totally agree with the logic of the article. And I do hope this will become a cultural thing. I just don't believe it will be widely accepted because of ingrained "free and open spirit".
I think, in practice, you'll be competing with fund-raising start-ups who provides free and better services with "free and open spirit" and lots of money ready to burn, after they took the large share of the market, small competitors will not be the only game in town, instead, they'll be out of the game.
That said, it's amazing that pinboard.in is still alive after so many bookmarking services closed. I guess the philosophy of Don't Be a Free User could work well on specific areas.
Cool, you can pay and be screwed a second time when the company is sold anyways.
It's some years later and pinboard shows no signs of slowing down, at least as far as I can tell. The guy who runs it makes a good living and he plans on keeping it going indefinitely.
Merely paying for a service does not ensure that the service will continue, and if your data or operations are integrated into a service then when it dies it can be anywhere between inconvenient to impossible to extract yourself, paid or not.
But that's the nature of the web especially, with its relative low barrier to entry. I shuddered when Fastmail was acquired by Opera, and was relieved when they split. Even old established IRL businesses come and go for various reasons.
Nothing in life is permanent, and so logically some of what you use and know is going to disappear in your lifetime.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My experience running a project/company like you describe: 1) Not the geeks, but the big multinational companies with disposable developer time end up using your open-source solution. Exactly the types of users I don't feel sorry for and would rather extract money from. 2) The "payback" in the form of bug reports and patches is negligible, because nobody likes to do work if they're not being compensated (either throu…
Can #1 be mitigated with a provision in the software license? "Free for personal use only" kind of thing.