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

Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

propublica.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 469 posts

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#131

Post by fsloth »

fivedogit wrote: post #83
hf wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are using Ubuntu, I see from your profile. How much have you paid them? This is how the stories goes: we haven't figured out how to make good work worthwhile. Perhaps we can learn something from our vast experience in profitably peddling shit?

We're our own worst enemies. Software developers have this sort of circular firing squad where nobody wants to be the first to keep their source closed and try to charge for it. Because then you're just "greedy" and not pure enough. But that'll never change unless all of a sudden we say "Ok, on the count of 3, everybody stop giving away their hard-earned expertise for free. 1... 2... 3..." We're like musicians nowada…

If anyone suggests it's not ok to make a living out of your chosen profession it's pretty okay to ignore their advice.

Some source is better to be open for all stakeholders, others... it's more or less irrelevant, unless you believe the entire world is out to get you.

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#132

Post by dreamdu5t »

This shouldn't be odd to anyone who's spent a large amount of time releasing open source. You just end up being used and uncompensated. At best you get a job offer from it.

It's really sad to me how many companies benefit from open source (including my own software) without the author ever being compensated.

It's hard for me to get motivated to do anything open source anymore because of the feeling that I'm just a gullible idiot in the end.

The feeling when I fix issues opened by people at VC-backed companies with millions of dollars is really really nasty. I always feel like such an idiot.

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#133

Post by fnordfnordfnord »

spiralpolitik wrote: post #75
jordigh wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wonder sometimes if this is the legacy that RMS was thinking about. No. Free software was never about no money being involved. In fact, RMS himself used to get a lot of money by selling free software. Back in the day when Emacs was too big for the internet, RMS used to sell Emacs tapes at 100 USD each (with documentation and source code, of course). In fact, he still thinks that you should be charging money for d…

It doesn't seem to be happening this way because FSF fundamentalists like RMS want the whole hog to be 'Free Software' not just 'Open Source'. Any compromise is unacceptable even if it means cutting off their nose to spite their face. See what happened to VLC as an example.

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#134

Post by takluyver »

unfamiliar wrote: post #105
teamhappy wrote: post #6

I've been complaining about this on HN before; lot's of startups built chat apps on top of GPG during the whole Snowden thing and Werner can't raise $120,000. I'm really glad Pro Publica picked it up, but I also think we need to change to way we think about critical software like GPG. The GPG Tools team (GPG for Apple Mail) recently stated they need to charge for the tool in the future because they simply can't handl…

>I also think we need to change to way we think about critical software like GPG Maybe the lesson here is not to license important software under such permissive licenses. Make it open source and free for non-commercial, require a donation if it is used in a commercial product. I don't really see how you can give something away for free and then expect companies to volunteer to pay for it.

> open source and free for non-commercial, require a donation if it is used in a commercial product

Every serious definition of 'open source' or 'free software' says that you can't discriminate by field of endeavour - if you have one set of rules for commercial use and one for non-commercial use, it's not really open source. And the nature of donations is that you can't require them.

That's not to say that you can't build a business model around open source software. You can charge for pre-built binaries, you can charge for exceptions to the GPL license to build proprietary software with it (this is what Qt used to do), or you can charge for services associated with the code (e.g. running a hosted service). You can even technically charge for the code itself, though since anyone who buys it can resell it or give it away, that sounds precarious.

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#135

Post by jgmmo »

gandalfu wrote: post #15
agwa wrote: post #4

Calling GnuPG "email encryption software" really understates its importance. It's also used in countless applications to encrypt data at rest, and GPG signatures are used to secure the distribution of software. For instance, GPG is an essential part of the package managers of Debian, Ubuntu, and RedHat. Here is a link to the donation page: https://gnupg.org/donate/index.html

Thanks for the link, just donated!

Me too.

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#136

Post by agwa »

Lord_Zero wrote: post #112
agwa wrote: post #4

Calling GnuPG "email encryption software" really understates its importance. It's also used in countless applications to encrypt data at rest, and GPG signatures are used to secure the distribution of software. For instance, GPG is an essential part of the package managers of Debian, Ubuntu, and RedHat. Here is a link to the donation page: https://gnupg.org/donate/index.html

I dont see a way to contact anyone there. Can they please add bitcoin?

"If you like to donate Bitcoins you may use the Wau Holland Stiftung account too."

Link: https://www.wauland.de/en/donation.html#61

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#137

Post by teamhappy »

unfamiliar wrote: post #105
teamhappy wrote: post #6

I've been complaining about this on HN before; lot's of startups built chat apps on top of GPG during the whole Snowden thing and Werner can't raise $120,000. I'm really glad Pro Publica picked it up, but I also think we need to change to way we think about critical software like GPG. The GPG Tools team (GPG for Apple Mail) recently stated they need to charge for the tool in the future because they simply can't handl…

>I also think we need to change to way we think about critical software like GPG Maybe the lesson here is not to license important software under such permissive licenses. Make it open source and free for non-commercial, require a donation if it is used in a commercial product. I don't really see how you can give something away for free and then expect companies to volunteer to pay for it.

Don't forget that permissive licenses are one of the main reasons people widely adopt these tools in the first place.

I hear you though. Free of charge and open source need to be two separate things (not all the time, of course). Cutting costs in FOSS development usually means spending less time on websites, documentation/support and UIs, which hurts the projects in the long term. It's a vicious cycle.

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#138

Post by chkuendig »

hf wrote: post #109
ryaniscool wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.fsf.org/about/financial The FSF had revenue of 1.25 million in 2013. I'm not trying to comment on where it came from or where it went to. I'm only pointing out that they are not in a very similar position.

Those are some rather interesting documents, thanks! In 2013 FSF paid $ 689,239 in salaries and, astoundingly!, $ 48,995 in credit card fees.

FIY: That's 3.8% assuming everybody donated by credit card.

Anybody got an idea why they pay so much?

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#139

Post by tjl »

joycey wrote: post #116

Here's something I think should get more love and is pretty relevant: a service that will automatically pay a percentage of Bitcoin donations for every submission to a GitHub repository: https://github.com/WhisperSystems/BitHub So if you donate to Open Whisper Systems, you can see that your donations are going directly to those that are contributing to the project, and you get paid more if you're contributing more. I…

I'm part of the SymPy project and we opted out of a similar program tip4commit. It's a bit easy to game. If you do it per commit, someone could just break up their work in smaller commits. The same thing with pull requests.

I can see bounties for issues fixed, but a per commit system is fundamentally flawed.

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#140

Post by dreamdu5t »

unreal37 wrote: post #2

There does seem to be a need for an "Internet fund". Pick 100 of the core free technologies that everyone relies on and pay people to maintain them.

... maybe the problem is people working for free and giving software away for free? The open source culture is a vehicle for entrepreneurs and investors to profit from others' work without compensation. It's that simple.

Hoping for donations to reasonably compensate developers is beyond naive.

Post reply on HN