This is a great idea. I'm curious to see how it evolves.
Same here!
Show HN: Get Paid to Build Your Next Side Project
211–220 of 473 posts
Re: Show HN: Get Paid to Build Your Next Side Project
#212Photoshop license costs $348 a year. If 1000 people get together and put $400 each, you'll get $400000. That money could be used to leverage a Gimp to be more Photoshop-users friendly. Then you don't have to keep with the subscription model. You have a great piece of open source software available for everyone to use as long as they want. You can do another round to get more features added. This solves the issue that…
Crowdfunding open source seems like a good idea in general (in fact I could see a platform built around that specifically), but you may be underestimating the amount of money/effort required to build something comparable to Photoshop. So I like the idea in principle, but not in this particular instance. For what it's worth, I think Sketch is much more user friendly and is $99 one-time. Certainly not OSS, but a better…
Sketch is 99 dollars a year. After the year you can still use it but you won't get updates. If you work on a team you'll pretty much be forced to always have the latest version.
Still, 99/year is a drop in the bucket. Even 50/month for all of creative suite isn't all that much considering many of us will just add it to our business expenses and write it off.
Re: Show HN: Get Paid to Build Your Next Side Project
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh but it is? Do you use the GIMP? Photoshop's content-aware fill first appeared as a third-party open-source plugin for the GIMP. While one certainly can't equate the two I have found GIMP works well for a broad array of digital imagery tasks... just like Photoshop. Much of Photoshop's dominance has to do with the network effects of Adobe's ubiquitous ecosystem as much as the comprehensiveness of their tooling.
> Photoshop's content-aware fill first appeared as a third-party open-source plugin for the GIMP. Indeed it did, and that plugin was hard to configure and hard to use. I remember installing GIMP just to try that plugin out, and it was not fun, it involved a lot of manual steps to get it working, and I never quite got the hang of it. In contrast, when I got my hands on a version of PS that supported content aware fill…
I still can't get the GIMP resynthesis plugins to run on most of my machines...
Re: Show HN: Get Paid to Build Your Next Side Project
#214Photoshop license costs $348 a year. If 1000 people get together and put $400 each, you'll get $400000. That money could be used to leverage a Gimp to be more Photoshop-users friendly. Then you don't have to keep with the subscription model. You have a great piece of open source software available for everyone to use as long as they want. You can do another round to get more features added. This solves the issue that…
Crowdfunding open source seems like a good idea in general (in fact I could see a platform built around that specifically), but you may be underestimating the amount of money/effort required to build something comparable to Photoshop. So I like the idea in principle, but not in this particular instance. For what it's worth, I think Sketch is much more user friendly and is $99 one-time. Certainly not OSS, but a better…
It's probably attainable if those 1000 people manage to confine their feature requests to something 400k can fund.
Re: Show HN: Get Paid to Build Your Next Side Project
#215Photoshop license costs $348 a year. If 1000 people get together and put $400 each, you'll get $400000. That money could be used to leverage a Gimp to be more Photoshop-users friendly. Then you don't have to keep with the subscription model. You have a great piece of open source software available for everyone to use as long as they want. You can do another round to get more features added. This solves the issue that…
$400k pays for 3 people.. maybe a couple of more if you hire from a cheaper country. If all GIMP needed was a few more developers to be competitive against PS, that would have happened by now. You're seriously underestimating the amount of work GIMP needs to do.. and/or the amount of work that already goes into GIMP.
Yeah ~3 FTE sounds about right. But if offered as grants for students to work on over internships or something, it would go a bit further. But I don't know enough about the GIMP codebase to know how feasible that would really be.
Re: Show HN: Get Paid to Build Your Next Side Project
#216Earlier quoted context omitted.
$400k pays for 3 people.. maybe a couple of more if you hire from a cheaper country. If all GIMP needed was a few more developers to be competitive against PS, that would have happened by now. You're seriously underestimating the amount of work GIMP needs to do.. and/or the amount of work that already goes into GIMP.
I wish my company spent 400k per 3 employees.
It very well may after you factor in office space, benefits, vacation, unemployment insurance, FICA, etc.
Re: Show HN: Get Paid to Build Your Next Side Project
#217"Copyright 2017 DemandRush" - I'm always surprised when I see these types of statements on US based websites.
In Europe, this would make no sense. A website is not a legal entity, so it can not be a copyright holder.
Does the statement make more sense in the US, or is it just a common misconception among people who build websites?
The terms page says "Welcome to DemandRush, a website and online service of Grafly, Inc". So I would expect the real copyright holder is Grafly Inc?
Re: Show HN: Get Paid to Build Your Next Side Project
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
I understand what you're getting at, but the price is an issue. I do something similar: I write very small programs for embedded systems: simple timers, sequencers, alarms, etc. for around $100. In some cases, we're talking 15 minutes of work, tops. If I could charge just $30 and instead sell it to multiple people, I would, but the odds of that happening are so slim, I have to have a $100 minimum. The problem is that…
I definitely understand the price issue. It might not be a lucrative or attractive business for existing freelancers. BUT... people already do this stuff for free. Create free Chrome Extensions to make some tweak on a website. Spend hours crafting a script for an answer on Stack Overflow, only to get fake internet points. I asked the questions above on SuperUser, a website that theoretically does exactly what I'm ask…
...and that's exactly what prompted me to do it. I would hang out on hardware sites, offering free help, fixing people's firmware, doing simple hardware design and writing short programs for the fun of it.
Then I realized I could do the same thing and get paid. It's just a matter of shifting the context. You've no doubt seen any number of sites where people post sample code to help someone, but disappear if it doesn't work, or there's a minor detail left off, etc.
The only change I made is that by paying me, I guarantee you it will work and I'll be around for future changes, extension, etc. A surprising number of people are willing to pay for the assurance over just getting free help.
Re: Show HN: Get Paid to Build Your Next Side Project
#219First I absolutely love the idea, and even more the execution, of this site.
Several questions about where could this go post 1-day HN buzz:
1. How are existing solutions being presented to the ignorant "wannabuy"?
2. How is this list sorted?
3. How are duplicates managed?
4. Where is the "discussion" required to even minimally spec the ideas and bring them to a buildable form?
Re: Show HN: Get Paid to Build Your Next Side Project
#220Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also not clear how it will be used later. It could be used to crop/remove watermarks or copyright messages, and I wouldn't develop it if that's its purpose.
Captcha solving is expensive for spammers.
I can assure you it is not. It's about $0.001 per solved captcha with 97% accuracy rate and refunds on failed ones, from the service provider I know of.
I've even written one, it's not complicated and not expensive.