The Lack of Compensation in Open Source Software Is Unsustainable • Hacker News Board

Re: The Lack of Compensation in Open Source Software Is Unsustainable

#291

Post by spencerflem » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 4:43 PM UTC

roenxi wrote: post #159

sofixa wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Either I do something for the love of it, or I am going for a paying job. Sometimes people are lucky and these two are the same, but that is very much the exception. Why should that be the exception? Why shouldn't people's passions, especially when they are widely useful to others, not be encouraged and turned into paying jobs? Everyone wins. The passionate can keep doing what they're passionate about without havin…

> Why shouldn't people's passions, especially when they are widely useful to others, not be encouraged and turned into paying jobs? Because there is no fair way of estimating what someone's work is worth without a free market. Sometimes it turns up weird outcomes like maintaining a critical driver being worth $0. If someone is willing to do something for free and the marginal cost of copying the work is 0 then by sim…

I think we Should - There's a ton of things like this where the benefits are huge but charging for it is impractical. And its kinda sad as a society that we can't figure out a way to fund such things

Re: The Lack of Compensation in Open Source Software Is Unsustainable

#292

Post by simbolit » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 4:48 PM UTC

rpastuszak wrote: post #264

sevagh wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I think the issue here is that we don't have a system where being an OSS contributor is a sustainable career path. They knew that before they started.

I meant it in a general sense, I think we'd be in a better place as a society if this model of work was easier to follow/more mainstream.

I am not sure what you are saying here.

Is this is a general critique of capitalist exploitation of the "software" field? Like, as in software should be a utility like fresh water or electricity?

If not, and you are relatively literal in what you write, the following question seems unavoidable:

What about coaches for youth sports? What about beach cleanup? What about a thousand other worthwhile and societally useful activities that people volunteer to do, but for which there is no sustainable career path? What makes OSS contributing any different from them?

Re: The Lack of Compensation in Open Source Software Is Unsustainable

#293

Post by matheusmoreira » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 4:49 PM UTC

xoac wrote: post #29

IMO a huge problem is that extremely permissive licenses have totally devalued software development as the software you release gives everyone the opportunity to infinitely exploit it. What did people think was going to happen? I find it especially funny when people complain "that they can't use the software 'at work'" when you release something as GPL.

Re: The Lack of Compensation in Open Source Software Is Unsustainable

#294

Post by ndsipa_pomu » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 4:51 PM UTC

YetAnotherNick wrote: post #287

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, if it's open source then users don't have any right to expect that it'll be maintained by someone, but if a project deliberately uses the bait and switch trick to get people to start using the project when it's open source in the hope of trapping them, then that's clearly manipulative and ruins trust in other open source projects.

Why? All they are claiming is that current version is open source and will remain open source. How is it different than stopping maintaining it altogether?

Because they released it as open source purely to lure people in and get them using it enough so that switching away would be difficult for them.

If they're up-front with people and mention that it'll be open source up until a time of their choosing, after which subsequent versions will be proprietary, then I don't see a problem and no-one's getting tricked.

When I'm choosing an open source tool to use, then I want to know whether it's under current development or is more or less abandoned. If the author suddenly decides to stop maintenance for some reason, then that's acceptable because they weren't trying to trick me into selecting their tool over others, though I'd still be looking to either switch to a different tool or see if the project has been forked. It's about honesty.

Re: The Lack of Compensation in Open Source Software Is Unsustainable

#295

Post by hyggetrold » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 4:53 PM UTC

pharmakom wrote: post #163

Galanwe wrote: post #101

Unfortunately, a system can be individually unsustainable while being globally sustainable. That is, maintainer burnout rate can be high, but a continuous influx of new maintainers could compensate. In fact, a lot of industries work like that, and numerous examples regularly appear on HN. Video game companies are notoriously full of super bright young developers, which are squeezed until burnout, just to be replaced…

> Unfortunately, a system can be individually unsustainable while being globally sustainable. Wow this is such a great description of the arts, fashion, Hollywood, game development, startups (?), …

It shows that the sustainability is not intended for humans, but for the entity they serve. When we talk about things being "sustainable" it's sustainable for the business, not for the people working in it.

Re: The Lack of Compensation in Open Source Software Is Unsustainable

#296

Post by ndsipa_pomu » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 4:54 PM UTC

sofixa wrote: post #284

blitz_skull wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you serious? No one is being FORCED to suffer in the United States. Such is the beauty of our freedom. No thanks, I’ll take the system that allows me to move up or down generally in correlation with my effort and work ethics.

> Are you serious? No one is being FORCED to suffer in the United States. Such is the beauty of our freedom. People have multiple jobs and can't afford healthcare and are living paycheck to paycheck or don't have parental leave or paid sick leave or paid time off do that because they want to, right?

They just need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and get born into a wealthy family

Re: The Lack of Compensation in Open Source Software Is Unsustainable

#297

Post by infamouscow » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 4:55 PM UTC

teddyh wrote: post #266

candiddevmike wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think a warranty is?

A warranty is about the code which already exists, and whether the code is fit for a particular purpose, etc. (all legal terms). The warranty disclaimer in free software licences all say basically “Although this specific version of the software is meant to be helpful to you for a certain purpose, you can’t sue the developer if there’s a bug or an omitted feature, since we don’t make any guarantee that it will work.”…

The distinction you're trying to make isn't recognized in the eyes of the law, nor really anyone else for that matter.

The warranty disclaimer in virtually every software project, regardless of license, has been around for decades. The text has been fairly anodyne except with the recent wave of parasites killing their host and trying to snake their way out of it.

Re: The Lack of Compensation in Open Source Software Is Unsustainable

#298

Post by PoutCo » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 5:03 PM UTC

The last time I checked the statistics, approximately 75% of the industry's codebase was open source—a significant portion! However, when it comes to the earnings of open-source developers, it's almost negligible.

I strongly believe that open-source contributors should be compensated for their work. So, in my opinion, there's a real need to establish an open-source economy where contributors can be fairly compensated for their work without compromising open-source principles.

I'm currently working on finding a compensation solution for OSS contributors. If you're interested in learning more, please don't hesitate to get in touch with me (see my profile).

Re: The Lack of Compensation in Open Source Software Is Unsustainable

#299

Post by Kim_Bruning » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 5:08 PM UTC

PoutCo wrote: post #298

The last time I checked the statistics, approximately 75% of the industry's codebase was open source—a significant portion! However, when it comes to the earnings of open-source developers, it's almost negligible. I strongly believe that open-source contributors should be compensated for their work. So, in my opinion, there's a real need to establish an open-source economy where contributors can be fairly compensated…

I think in the minds of many, software patents are the means of getting people to disclose their source. But they currently don't work that way anywhere.

(edit: actually IIRC it's fine to sometimes promote what you're doing on HN, so long as it's not Every Single Post) . Can you tell us a bit more?

Re: The Lack of Compensation in Open Source Software Is Unsustainable

#300

Post by bogwog » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 5:11 PM UTC

jh0486 wrote: post #241

I understand this is a jaded take, but it's not wrong. Open source entered a bubble because companies started requiring active open source contributions to staff+ engineering requirements. The model was never sustainable. A select few contribute to open source out of sheer passion, but the majority are/were using it as a career advancement mechanism or network effect. The result is that major companies were able to a…

This is what I dislike about OSI. It feels like their mission is specifically to provide free labor to megacorps. The FSF has (IMO) goals that have a more tangible benefit to society, and while megacorps can and do use free software without contributing anything, that feels like more of a side effect than the primary goal of the movement.

If you know that someone is going to take your code and make money off of it anyways (which is almost guaranteed whether you pick an FSF or OSI license), then you might as well make it so that society can benefit from this too. GPL/AGPL do this, MIT/BSD/etc do not.

And as an aside, I feel like it should be easier to profit from open source if you pick a license like AGPL. Companies that want to use it can pay you (the sole rights holder) for a commercial friendly license, while everyone else can use the free license. This is the same model for Qt/KDE.

You don't even need to sell support, and could probably even throw up a self service checkout page for commercial licenses. Thats minimal effort for maximizing profit lol.