Live data from Hacker News

The Lack of Compensation in Open Source Software Is Unsustainable

trstringer.com

401–410 of 413 posts

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

#401
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but what isn't clear to me is why maintainers don't ignore these people. One reason is that you're being told that that's an awful thing to do by basically every resource on "proper open-source" you can find. Another is that these people are pretty good at starting shit storms trying to ruin your reputation if you don't comply with their unreasonable demands. It's also worth nothing that some requests/issues/questi…

>> but what isn't clear to me is why maintainers don't ignore these people. >One reason is that you're being told that that's an awful thing to do by basically every resource on "proper open-source" you can find. The solution is clear. Just apply the grandparent's advice recursively: Ignore these "resources" (!) on "proper open-source", too. Also, that term sounds awfully entitled to me, too. Who the heck is anyone t…

Apropos of this thread, and related to the recent HN post about a new Calibre version release, I googled Calibre and its creator, Kovid Goyal, casually, and was interested to see this older HN thread:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32052669

Which does go to show both kinds of opposing viewpoints about this whole "entitled" attitude of some OSS users vs. the maintainers, w.r.t. to the specific case of Calibre and Kovid. Based on that thread alone, it shows that is easy to get prejudiced by one negative comment about a maintainer, whether true or false, and not know about or ignore all the other positive work and behavior by him/her.

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

#402
IMO, OSS works because it is open and free. Most OSS projects use each other. If you are building some OSS project then are you not using other OSS projects? Many contributors will not be able to build if it requires/expects money to use other OSS projects.

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

#403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, ye olden 'capitalism, or dystopian despair!' Strangely one of those things that culturally, we can't get past. It's a false dichotomy at best, and completely ignores the costs of implementing capitalism.

If you take away capitalism, you are still going to need a system. The alternatives are either anarchism (and I don't fancy living in a Mad Max-style world), or some form of dictatorship: either communism, or outright dictatorship, or theocracy, or some neofeudal BS. In all of them there is a single strong man at the top who will tell you what to do, and kill you if you don't. Capitalism at least gives you the freedo…

The alternatives are clearly unexplored and the whole situation is described as either/or between systems.

What freedom does capitalism bring you? Freedom only exists under capitalism if you have enough capital to avoid the bottom rungs.

Free to work 8+ hours a day at a job I'll never get the full value out of? Free to work for a sociopathic POS that only sees workers as lines in a spreadsheet?

Get real. Capitalism cannot bring good to people's lives. We frame it that way because our societies literally cannot think of another way to do things.

Imagine saying 'sorry, unilateral exploitation is the only way'.

What intellectual rot.

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

#404
post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know why you're mixing political and economic systems. The two are often related, but not intricately linked. Capitalism and democracy are orthogonal, and there have been plenty of capitalist but undemocratic (e.g. fascist) regimes out there, like there have been democratic countries with social democratic (aka not unfettered capitalism) economic systems.

You have to, because people do not work for free ("each to the best of their ability, and taking according to their need") if they can freeload. The only way to get them to be productive members of society is either a carrot (the capitalist system, which offers an improved standard of life for those who work hard), or a stick (the communist system, which offers imprisonment or death if you do not work hard). That for…

What does the theory of capitalism have to say about people who do the work but never get the carrot?

No True Scotsman in 3, 2...

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

#405
post #238
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% agreed. I've had my response to this sitting in my drafts folder for years now. Finally published it now after reading this thing. https://kodare.net/2023/11/17/open_source_could_be_better.ht... ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38302122 )

Your web site said “[CLAPPING HANDS SIGN] 3 claps”. Since I didn’t know what that meant, I clicked on it. It changed to say “[CLAPPING HANDS SIGN] 4 claps”. Now I feel like the person in that old joke about someone standing by a well or a cliff, repeating a number out loud.

  I stole that thing from how medium does it. I think it's a good middle ground between absolutely no feedback and comments.

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

#406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you prefer everyone (of course with some minor exceptions for higher ups) to be equally "not great, but not terrible" or do you prefer some to have amazing lives, but others to suffer? This isn't the choice. Socialism (actual socialism) repeatedly starves its populations. Capitalism repeatedly creates situations where new things are created that make everyone's lives better, and existing things get cheaper and b…

> Capitalism repeatedly creates situations where new things are created that make everyone's lives better, and existing things get cheaper and better over time. > everyone's lives better > things get cheaper and better over time. Oh, fuck off with that bullshit. Capitalism may appear to thrive when living in a first-world country, but only does so through exploitation and cutting corners. More to the point, isn't it…

> Capitalism may appear to thrive when living in a first-world country, but only does so through exploitation and cutting corners

I think this is a common and really fundamental misunderstanding. It works through signalling demand through pricing, rather than through bureaucrats guessing, giving anyone the chance to take a risk and keep the reward (mostly) if they manage to create value for other people, rather than how much they toe the party line. It definitely doesn't only work "through exploitation and cutting corners". Those things happen everywhere.

Just look at the monumental change in China due to the controlled (too controlled[0]) introduction of capitalism. If you let people create value for each other and get out of their way, you get stupendous results compared to thinking a centralised bureaucracy, slave-owner, monarch, or lord making the decisions.

> No, some abstract 'informed exchange of currency' didn't magically cause things to appear out of thin air

No one would say it did.

> People make things, and they are almost certainly underpaid and overworked. Behind every AI model there are X poorly paid workers around the world that curated the data that it needs to function. Behind every piece of clothing there are Y poorly paid workers in Bangladesh that made it. And behind every rechargeable battery there are Z Congolese kids risking death inside a mine in search for cobalt.

This isn't a capitalism thing. This is a poverty thing. It's lifted unequally globally, but it is lifted. The problem isn't capitalism; the problem is that doing these jobs is currently their best option. Similar or worse conditions were found in Britain under 100 years ago[1]. That's a very short timeframe for capitalism to have lifted the entire world out of poverty; too silly to take seriously as a criticism of an economic process.

> We might try to (and often do) look away, pretend that those are the unfortunate results of corporate blunders that seldom happen, but they're not. Invisible exploitation is what makes the kind of lifestyle that is available in first-world countries possible.

No, not just that. If we replaced those miners with robots we'd still have the lifestyle. Framing everything as exploitation is a dead end.

[0] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-56448688

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_to_Wigan_Pier

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

#407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to, because people do not work for free ("each to the best of their ability, and taking according to their need") if they can freeload. The only way to get them to be productive members of society is either a carrot (the capitalist system, which offers an improved standard of life for those who work hard), or a stick (the communist system, which offers imprisonment or death if you do not work hard). That for…

What does the theory of capitalism have to say about people who do the work but never get the carrot? No True Scotsman in 3, 2...

It says they either chose that option for themselves and are happy with the outcome, or that they will find the outcome unsatisfactory and move on to do something else, something with more carrots.

I'm not sure why this is even a question, you could have thought of this yourself: "I think I'm not earning enough. Should I stick around in this job or find a better one?"

Your snide comment is also not a response to what I posted, but I guess presenting a counter argument is just too difficult.

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

#408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edit 2: you're right, I read the parent comment backwards. They're saying that people using open source code have no right to place demands on contributors. This is a teachable moment for me, so I'll leave my thought process below, even though it doesn't apply now. -- If I follow your logic, then you're saying that there's no economic incentive to work on open source software, since it's not compensated financially.…

To put it in the broader context (outside of what the start of this thread was) - i view it similar to painting. Do some people get rich selling paintings, sure some do. Do most people? absolutely not. Is that a problem, i don't particularly think so. People paint for a variety of reasons, some ecconomic, but most not. Similarly people contribute to open source for a variety of reasons, some ecconomic some not. > It…

Ok that's actually very insightful, comparing open source to art.

I got triggered (saw what I wanted to see instead of what was there) because I've been involved with so many projects that failed (say 90+%) that my average hourly "wage" probably comes out to $3/hr over my lifetime. While that's a decent wage in many parts of the world, where I live it means struggle and destitution as a starving artist. "Let them eat cake" comes to mind, because I've never had the baseline stability needed to make the contributions in my heart. So I didn't, I just spent all the years of my adult life working towards other people's dreams, and what people see of me today is the shadow left behind of someone who lost dozens of bets in a row with little to show for it.

I'm concerned that AI encroaching on the last viable artistic endeavors like painting, playing music, writing (and now designing software!) could grind us under the heal of the status quo even harder. Yet people make $100+/hr working at FAANG by standing on the achievements of open source while giving almost nothing back.

I don't see a way out of this, so without some kind of human intervention, we have maybe 10 years left before the sky falls. That could be the start of the New Age (heaven on Earth) or it could be the total subjugation of humanity beneath technology (a living hell). Unfortunately the powers that be have chosen the second route, whether they are consciously aware of it or not.

Is there anything we can do to balance the scales? All I can think of is to withhold our labor. But when AI automates that, there truly will be no recourse. The value of labor will fall towards zero and we could be looking at a luddite revolution where people sabotage tech in a misguided attempt to save themselves. When we could have planned for that eventuality and chosen something like UBI instead.

It breaks my heart, but my heart is already broken. I guess that's why I have moved to magical thinking through stuff like meditation in an effort to manifest the world that might have been. An unsatisfiable ego-driven tech can only be defeated by a conscious soul-driven love.

Like how does one contemplate zen as the world burns? That's what this problem of under-compensation hits on for me. It's maybe the central problem of our time, or at least my time. Separating me from the life I had envisioned. For me, more tech has merely resulted in more suffering at the hands of it.

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

#409
post #38
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the evidence for this feeling of entitlement? I use tons of free software. I've never either demanded that anyone work on it for free, nor have I expressed any sense of entitlement or expectation.

One example I noticed recently is when YouTube stopped allowing ad-blockers. You should have seen the people posting on the uBlock subreddit demanding it being fixed, it was kind of crazy.

why would any sane maintainer even look at the subreddit for their software for even 1 second?

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

#410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

> When I'm choosing an open source tool to use, then I want

BZZT! You just said "I want" in relation to something you get for free.

There are only two valid paths, enjoy stuff for free and expect nothing or pay up and expect whatever you want. Can't have both.

Post reply on HN