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

I'm not good enough to work on open source software

journal.dedasys.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–77 of 77 posts

Re: I'm not good enough to work on open source software

#71

Post by eli_gottlieb »

smsm42 wrote: post #56
eli_gottlieb wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then imagine the Indians, or the Germans, or (to a much lesser extent) the Israelis. The point is, what if someone says, "My comparative advantage will be that I steal your code and localize it for people who don't speak your language"? Baidu is Chinese Google, Wallah is Israeli Yahoo. Once you've got web designs out in public, or important algorithms like PageRank in published research papers, these supposed "trade…

Baidu and Wallah did not "steal code" from Google and Yahoo. You can argue they "stole" ideas of search and portal, but that would imply there's ownership of these concepts and it belongs to Google and Yahoo - which is wrong on both counts, both ideas existed long before their implementations by current kings of the hill, and nobody owns them. If you think copying Google is "dead easy", you're well on the way to beco…

>As for "respect for intellectual property", I don't see why Chinese should necessarily respect artificial mental constructs that were erected by Western politicians in order to produce some utilitarian value.

I don't either. But you've missed my fundamental claim: lacking any kind of "intellectual property" enforcement, pretty much nothing stops people from treating the code for web-services the exact same way they treat the code for video games or office suites: avast ye maties!

Also, DuckDuckGo seems pretty good to me.

Re: I'm not good enough to work on open source software

#72

Post by smsm42 »

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #71
smsm42 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Baidu and Wallah did not "steal code" from Google and Yahoo. You can argue they "stole" ideas of search and portal, but that would imply there's ownership of these concepts and it belongs to Google and Yahoo - which is wrong on both counts, both ideas existed long before their implementations by current kings of the hill, and nobody owns them. If you think copying Google is "dead easy", you're well on the way to beco…

>As for "respect for intellectual property", I don't see why Chinese should necessarily respect artificial mental constructs that were erected by Western politicians in order to produce some utilitarian value. I don't either. But you've missed my fundamental claim: lacking any kind of "intellectual property" enforcement, pretty much nothing stops people from treating the code for web-services the exact same way they…

I didn't miss it - I actually addressed it in another comment. While stealing your website code would be unpleasant, it doesn't really matter that much. First, backend website code is not protected by copyright because it's not published - only the design is. Second, do you really think Facebook became Facebook because they found right magic color and right column widths to be successful, and if only you could use the same design you would be billionaire? This is obviously nonsense - Facebook success is composed of many factors, design being very very minor part.

As for DDG, I used it for a month to test, and unfortunately had to go back to Google - for my loads, its quality proved to be inadequate, Google found what I needed in more cases than they did. It may be because usually I search for very easy and obvious stuff. I would like to say my coworkers "why, you still use Google? Man, it's so 2000s... It's 2012 now, use something that's not ancient!" Unfortunately, it's not the time yet that I could do that.

Re: I'm not good enough to work on open source software

#73

Post by eurleif »

smsm42 wrote: post #72
eli_gottlieb wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>As for "respect for intellectual property", I don't see why Chinese should necessarily respect artificial mental constructs that were erected by Western politicians in order to produce some utilitarian value. I don't either. But you've missed my fundamental claim: lacking any kind of "intellectual property" enforcement, pretty much nothing stops people from treating the code for web-services the exact same way they…

I didn't miss it - I actually addressed it in another comment. While stealing your website code would be unpleasant, it doesn't really matter that much. First, backend website code is not protected by copyright because it's not published - only the design is. Second, do you really think Facebook became Facebook because they found right magic color and right column widths to be successful, and if only you could use th…

> First, backend website code is not protected by copyright because it's not published

Unpublished works are protected by copyright. http://copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm

Re: I'm not good enough to work on open source software

#74

Post by gte910h »

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #70
gte910h wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>some projects cannot be done as day jobs >OS kernels It's funny you mention that one: My day job for a number of years to was to do linux kernel drivers and other patches. The fact that Linus didn't work fulltime on Linux seems to contradict your assertion that some projects require full time workers.

>The fact that Linus didn't work fulltime on Linux seems to contradict your assertion that some projects require full time workers. I didn't make any such assertion. My assertion was that coders need full-time jobs.

>some projects cannot be done as day jobs

Re: I'm not good enough to work on open source software

#75

Post by smsm42 »

eurleif wrote: post #73
smsm42 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't miss it - I actually addressed it in another comment. While stealing your website code would be unpleasant, it doesn't really matter that much. First, backend website code is not protected by copyright because it's not published - only the design is. Second, do you really think Facebook became Facebook because they found right magic color and right column widths to be successful, and if only you could use th…

> First, backend website code is not protected by copyright because it's not published Unpublished works are protected by copyright. http://copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm

But wouldn't you need to distribute for copyright protection to kick in? Copyright is exclusive right to distribute. If you just stole the code and keep it, you can be liable to various crimes, but I don't see how copyright infringement can be one of them.

Re: I'm not good enough to work on open source software

#76

Post by antirez »

davidw wrote: post #64
ajross wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that just saying that LiberWriter is a more successful product than Hecl? I mean, if Google or whoever wanted to base a service on Hecl, they would have hired you, right? My analogy was to startup funding, not sales, but I think it still holds. Certainly if you make something people want, people will pay you to develop it. I don't see a real problem with the model, though for obvious reasons the incentives are…

Several companies used Hecl code, including one that was later sold to BlackBerry, so there was some demand for it commercially, just that apparently the code was good enough or clear enough that they didn't need any further involvement from me. My point is that for people to start hiring you at a high hourly rate, there's got to be a burning demand , whereas with a product or app, the costs are much lower, so it's e…

That's the problem IMHO. Company get sold for X, and did substantial business with Hecl? Get x/200 or alike and give it to the Hecl developer as a donation.

It's not too hard... Open source coders are likely to write more open source software, so it's a good investment for the collectivity.

Re: I'm not good enough to work on open source software

#77

Post by gcp »

simonbrown wrote: post #31
gcp wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure it was necessary to refer to the "I'm not good enough" thing. It really has little to nothing to do with your point. Because you've just undermined your own example (Guido Van Rossum / Python / Google) above, it weakens your position. If I get it correctly, your point is that one requires copyright for open source software to be viable, by opening up a revenue stream to support the (free) open source par…

How are they similar? Trademarks just prevent people from using the branding, and just represents a minor hurdle (see CENTOS), while copyright (with a restrictive license) would prevent people using almost anything. If trademarks are the main protection, the main barrier to entry is branding, not technology. (IANAL)

Trademarks are copyright on the branding.

If trademarks are the main protection, the main barrier to entry is branding, not technology.

Yes. Isn't that obviously the case for open source software?

Post reply on HN