Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The incompatibility of open core and profit

bytesdataaction.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 98 posts

Re: The incompatibility of open core and profit

#51

Post by worthless-trash »

throw_human wrote: post #46
sneak wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corporations don't exist. Amazon is made of people: shareholders and staff. Software doesn't run itself and corporations don't run software: human beings do. There's no such thing as a non-human entity running software.

>Corporations don't exist. Amazon is made of people: shareholders and staff. >Software doesn't run itself and corporations don't run software: human beings do. >There's no such thing as a non-human entity running software. People don't exist they are made up of cells. Humans don't run themselves: cells do. There is no such thing as a non-cell entity running humans.

> People don't exist they are made up of cells.

> Humans don't run themselves: cells do.

> There is no such thing as a non-cell entity running humans.

Biology don't exist, they are made of atoms

Cells dont run themselvs, atoms do.

There is no such thing as a non atom entity running cells.

We has a species have a hard time trusting atoms, they make up everything.

Re: The incompatibility of open core and profit

#52

Post by kgodey »

teddyh wrote: post #47
kgodey wrote: post #27

I've been thinking about this problem a lot, since I'm trying to figure out how to sustain our open source project. Our project is complex enough that it requires a few full-time people to maintain it. Our current funding comes from a grant, which is not sustainable in the long term. I'm philosophically opposed to open core because tying revenue to proprietary features seems like the wrong incentive structure, I can'…

> I've been thinking about this problem a lot, since I'm trying to figure out how to sustain our open source project. It’s worrying, and maybe telling, that you don’t mention whom the project benefits . Who are the people who want this project to exist? Those are the people who would be willing to pay to ensure its continued existence and maintenance. Exactly what form that takes is mostly psychological, and will the…

> It’s worrying, and maybe telling, that you don’t mention whom the project benefits.

I was trying to avoid talking about the specifics of the project (I didn't want to come across as self-promotional).

We only did our first release this week, so no one is invested in the project (yet). We have hypotheses about who it benefits but haven't had enough time to test them. Our current goal is to build a user base and that will give us the information we need to work on long term sustainability.

Re: The incompatibility of open core and profit

#53

Post by ahepp »

The author is the CEO of one of the companies they say has the solution to this "problem". I guess they technically say that in a footnote, but it's pretty far below the fold.

How can you criticize hosted cloud services for maybe not being open source enough, but then suggest closed source services with an open source interface as somehow being a better alternative?

How can you criticize dual licensing, but then suggest "source available" as an alternative?

> Saying that “Open Source = Good, Proprietary = Bad” is too simplistic. Adopting this mentality leads to businesses that take advantage of unsuspecting victims.

I agree wholeheartedly with the first sentence! But I don't think the author provided any convincing examples to support the claim that open core businesses are somehow taking advantage of users. Yeah, users should be careful not to unintentionally lock themselves into a SaaS that is _technically_ open source. Hard for me to see how _any_ of the author's proposed alternatives are better in that regard.

Re: The incompatibility of open core and profit

#54

Post by ahepp »

nonethewiser wrote: post #23
j6zauas4gz wrote: post #11

I might be willing to buy that open core/open source and the standard VC funded "startup" esq business model are incompatible. But I don't think open core and open source are incompatible with profit or with sustainable business models. Sure, the nature of open source might preclude you from breaking into the millions of dollars of revenue / funding (I dont buy that though, to be honest) but even if thats true those…

If your value can be completely replicated by cloning your repo and self hosting then I think that’s maximally useful for open source but leaves no reason for you to exist. Meanwhile if you can open source your software and protect your profits then your software isn’t actually that valuable. I suppose there may be some exceptions but generally speaking I think it’s an inverse relationship. And it’s basically the sam…

Aren't dual licensing and support contracts kinda solutions to these problems? They're certainly not perfect though.

Re: The incompatibility of open core and profit

#55

Post by ahepp »

judge2020 wrote: post #43
nonethewiser wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your value can be completely replicated by cloning your repo and self hosting then I think that’s maximally useful for open source but leaves no reason for you to exist. Meanwhile if you can open source your software and protect your profits then your software isn’t actually that valuable. I suppose there may be some exceptions but generally speaking I think it’s an inverse relationship. And it’s basically the sam…

> It feels like we’re in denial about free software being free. As always, it's free as in freedom, but also free as in your company taking a beer from the cold hands of the solo maintainer.

Maybe I misinterpreted this, but I think they're saying the person in denial is the maintainer. As in, if you want to get paid for something, don't give it away for free.

Re: The incompatibility of open core and profit

#57

Post by spit2wind »

What about creating an open core business around a pre-existing open source project?

I see Open Core Ventures (ala gitlab) trying to do that with FreeCAD. If there already exists a strong community, if the core project benefits from contributions, and the company diverges with proprietary offerings, the main project still wins, right?

Re: The incompatibility of open core and profit

#58

Post by blakeburch »

ahepp wrote: post #53

The author is the CEO of one of the companies they say has the solution to this "problem". I guess they technically say that in a footnote, but it's pretty far below the fold. How can you criticize hosted cloud services for maybe not being open source enough, but then suggest closed source services with an open source interface as somehow being a better alternative? How can you criticize dual licensing, but then sugg…

Just want to clarify - I do not think we have the solution to this problem nor do I claim that cloud services are not open source enough. Rather, I decided to take one (of many) possible avenues that I believe is more upfront and honest about our relationship with open source that directly aligns with our business incentives.

The difference to me is honesty and intent from the outset. Open core companies tend to lean into "we'll figure out how to monetize later" which inherently means it's harder to trust what they say now because their incentives are guaranteed to shift towards monetization eventually. The other models bake in monetization from the start, so you know what you're getting into when you start using the product.

Re: The incompatibility of open core and profit

#59

Post by yuhaa98 »

wokwokwok wrote: post #31
armchairhacker wrote: post #20

Open core is the only way to really monetize open-source software. You see this issue with core-js, you see it with mold linker, which went "open core" in a desperate attempt to get more funding. At the end of the day we must remember that people need to make money and most simply don't have the time or desire to make open-source for free. And until more people actually get adequately paid for making open-source, ope…

> until more people actually get adequately paid for making open-source, open core should not only be tolerated but encouraged Come on, did you actually read the article or skim the first paragraphs? The authors point is that open core is not a model that enables small time developers to fund their projects. …it’s a deceptive, deliberate marketing strategy funded by venture capital to run a loss leader and capture ma…

Is it better to keep everything proprietary?

Re: The incompatibility of open core and profit

#60

Post by yuhaa98 »

throw_human wrote: post #48
mattigames wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From his/her wording I assume they mean some unspecified threshold before a group of people is considered a corporation. From my limited understanding I think it could be useful to have a license that is only for free for organizations made of (for example) 10 people or less.

The license is only granted to natural born persons. The only people who don't grasp this simple fact are the ones who have never worked in a corporation. They very much own and run things legally. Which is why when the liquidation man comes a knocking you don't lose your shirt for owning stock in Enron.

Now let's say somebody in a corp uses the software for some minor task. Are they allowed? Is it the person or the corp "using" it?

If the latter, let's say me and my buddy both use the software individually, legally. We sit in the same room. Ok? We are together working on some non-profit project not involving the software. Ok? Now we use the software for it. Ok? Niw we make a profit. Ok?

Where do you draw the line?

RMS would be pretty opposed to these ideas.

Post reply on HN