31–40 of 63 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Open source is enabling large corporations to establish monopolies. Open source powers google and amazon yet the authors get little return from it. Open source has killed indie development.
And we all get a better product because of it, moving the ship of humanity a little bit further along.
Open source isn't eating all proprietary software. Open source is enabling proprietary software to be more profitable, because it makes free all the commodity pieces that are needed to make proprietary software work. Customers would otherwise have to pay for these things (in an ongoing manner) leaving less of their $$$ to spend on your payload. Open source powers SaaS which is so closed and proprietary that the user…
> Of course, if your business is selling operating systems, development tools, databases and other infrastructure stuff, then, yup, open source has eaten your business. It seems like the rule is that open source is eating all-except-niche software.
I think I still agree with most of the points in the article, but if I were to write this today I'd emphasize the role of Cloud and SaaS even more.
I think it's pretty clear that Cloud has become the dominant way to consume open-source for new projects.
It's also true that SaaS is already replacing traditional proprietary "on premise" software.
But I think there's a wrinkle here: open-source software can still build larger communities (and as a result, reduce reliance on a single vendor) than a SaaS company ever can.
For example, look at Elasticsearch. Even if you don't want to run Elasticsearch yourself, you can choose to run it on Elastic Cloud or on AWS. So now you have at least two different companies who are invested in making Elasticsearch better for you. Compare this to Sumologic or Splunk, where you are clearly beholden to that vendor.
In other words, SaaS is the new proprietary software. And I still believe that open-source is poised to "eat" it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And we all get a better product because of it, moving the ship of humanity a little bit further along.
And a little less freedom, and a little more 9 to 5, moving software engineers into bricklayer positions a little more each day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you’re saying everything except “operating systems, development tools, databases and other infrastructure stuff” is “niche software”? I’m not following, e.g., that would make Google and Facebook niche software?
They are extremely niche in a sense. There are very few other search engines (all much smaller), and there's no another Facebook. The market just naturally gravitates to the biggest player.
Ah, timescaledb. They are funny. I tried them really hard. I was rooting for them. Then it bit me: death by a thousand papercuts One of the many papercuts was actually more serious, to the point it was funny: I remember how in their stable versions, they had a humorous bug: if you did \copy instead of insert to a timescaledb, the timestamps looked right when you eyeballed them with a select, but acted wrong when you…
Hey there, glad you think we are funny, but sorry to hear you are having problems. This problem you mentioned is new to me - have not seen it before. Did you file a Github issue for this? Happy to chat more there (or feel free to ping me directly - ajay (at) timescale.com).
Just try to do a massive '\copy from' into a table that is already a timescaledb, using a tsv source with at least a few million records, make sure the dates are well spread out. Then use windowing functions to count the records per time unit. Compare date_trunc to time_bucket and select. Unless the issue was silently fixed, I'm sure you will be laughting too - but I recommend you wait until after xmas to have that good hearthy laugh, as it may cause you to want to fix the issue ASAP :)
Once of the field was defaulting to NOW(), maybe that's what caused the funny bug but I didn't investigate much after that. It was the straw that broke the camel back. Thousand papercuts. Not worth the time investment.
Some types of software lend themselves to Open Source, others don't. I once saw a disparaging comment in a forum attempting to create an open-source accounting package, "who would want to work on that boring stuff?"
See http://progenygenealogy.blogspot.com/2018/01/the-open-source...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey there, glad you think we are funny, but sorry to hear you are having problems. This problem you mentioned is new to me - have not seen it before. Did you file a Github issue for this? Happy to chat more there (or feel free to ping me directly - ajay (at) timescale.com).
As timescaledb is now banned with all third party extensions, I don't have a server where I can reproduce that. But it was 100% reproducible on a very simple routine scenario (add many records to an existing timescale db) Just try to do a massive '\copy from' into a table that is already a timescaledb, using a tsv source with at least a few million records, make sure the dates are well spread out. Then use windowing…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey there, glad you think we are funny, but sorry to hear you are having problems. This problem you mentioned is new to me - have not seen it before. Did you file a Github issue for this? Happy to chat more there (or feel free to ping me directly - ajay (at) timescale.com).
As timescaledb is now banned with all third party extensions, I don't have a server where I can reproduce that. But it was 100% reproducible on a very simple routine scenario (add many records to an existing timescale db) Just try to do a massive '\copy from' into a table that is already a timescaledb, using a tsv source with at least a few million records, make sure the dates are well spread out. Then use windowing…
These three categories cover the spectrum of motives for doing software.
What's key is to respect these motives and protect the legal regime that supports their creative tension.