NPM Bans Terminal Ads • Hacker News Board

Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads

#201

Post by ken » Fri, Aug 30, 2019, 5:08 PM UTC

cj wrote: post #11

While I don't particularly like the idea of stuffing ads into npm logs, I don't have the same visceral negative reaction that many people have in these HN threads on this topic. The overwhelming majority of the people complaining about this are well-paid tech workers writing code for well-funded companies that profit off of open source code without providing any reciprocal value to the open source projects in return.…

I disagree with the premise that companies don't contribute to open-source. It's a rare open-source library that I don't contribute back to in some way, and that was even more true when I worked at big or rich tech companies. All software has bugs. Half the point of using an open-source library is so I can fix them!

It's also strange to use "maintainers" as the worthy recipient here, since in almost every case I've seen, these people were also working for a big rich tech company, and very well paid already.

The programmer in question sold his last company to Yahoo. He's got a Patreon page (hundreds of dollars a month), a GitHub Sponsor page (at least hundreds of dollars a month, and possibly much more). The software in question is a "JavaScript style guide, linter, and formatter". I don't think any company is "generating massive amounts of revenue" from a JS style linter. The GitHub page has a "gold sponsor" ($500/month) advertisement, too.

The problem with advertising is that (as someone here described it recently) it's an arms race. When anyone starts using them, everyone else will struggle unless they match, and that makes life worse for everyone. Is contributing bug fixes to open-source software, plus the occasional corporate sponsor, not sufficient contribution to the community and ecosystem? What exactly is the goal here? Are we upset that developers don't earn enough money?

Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads

#202

Post by chipotle_coyote » Fri, Aug 30, 2019, 5:12 PM UTC

saagarjha wrote: post #180

heyoni wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when are FAANG companies considered to be closed source? Have any of them snatched up maintainers to continue development behind closed doors? There are examples of large corporations hiring maintainers to work on open source and keep those projects open source. I believe pypi is an example of that.

I am fairly certain that Apple has hired people who previously worked on permissively-licensed projects to work on the closed-source fork.

I'd like to see that backed up, really. There are certainly criticisms to be made of how Apple has handled their open source projects (slow to update and push out new releases, not great at cooperating with upstream projects when Apple has forked them, typically cryptic Apple communication practices). But if Apple has taken open source projects, created closed-source forks of them, and hired original developers of and/or major contributors to the original open source project to maintain and develop the closed source fork without contributing back to the open source original, none of them immediately come to mind.

Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads

#203

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Aug 30, 2019, 5:14 PM UTC

cj wrote: post #11

While I don't particularly like the idea of stuffing ads into npm logs, I don't have the same visceral negative reaction that many people have in these HN threads on this topic. The overwhelming majority of the people complaining about this are well-paid tech workers writing code for well-funded companies that profit off of open source code without providing any reciprocal value to the open source projects in return.…

[deleted]

Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads

#204

Post by mindslight » Fri, Aug 30, 2019, 5:14 PM UTC

cj wrote: post #11

While I don't particularly like the idea of stuffing ads into npm logs, I don't have the same visceral negative reaction that many people have in these HN threads on this topic. The overwhelming majority of the people complaining about this are well-paid tech workers writing code for well-funded companies that profit off of open source code without providing any reciprocal value to the open source projects in return.…

Everyone agrees that Free and Open software needs better funding models. If it could somehow manage to obtain one hundredth the revenue stream of Surveillance Valley, projects could pay full time employees to polish up UX and compete for popular mindshare.

The problem here is the showing an ad is working directly against the user, and working directly against the user violates a core expectation of open software. A thing cannot be supported by destroying the thing itself.

It would also be unacceptable to backhaul system information for "market research", run a Bitcoin miner, add entries to authorized_keys, flash epileptic trigger patterns, etc. We would rightly call such additions security incidents, as is this attempt at psychologically manipulating users.

Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads

#205

Post by fouric » Fri, Aug 30, 2019, 5:14 PM UTC

zelon88 wrote: post #106

cj wrote: post #11

While I don't particularly like the idea of stuffing ads into npm logs, I don't have the same visceral negative reaction that many people have in these HN threads on this topic. The overwhelming majority of the people complaining about this are well-paid tech workers writing code for well-funded companies that profit off of open source code without providing any reciprocal value to the open source projects in return.…

I release a ton of my work with open source licensing and I've never thought of it as a revenue stream. If people are financially burdened by making their project open-source; then don't make it open source. Donating something to the community and then getting offended when nobody reciprocates is disingenuous. It's part of the problem with "freemium" software these days where developers think I should be indebted to…

> It's not for everyone, so if you already bitch about being hungry all the time maybe you should just look into a day job instead.

The problem is that there's an increasingly influential movement in the software engineering community to shun not only proprietary software, but also several alternative revenue models (such as "software as a service") that use open-source code. If you're part of this movement, then making money off of donations to open-source software is one of only two known, viable ways to be paid to write code (with the other being paid support contracts).

I am not part of this movement, only attempting to provide you with some additional context that might explain some of the opinions you see here.

Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads

#206

Post by mrosett » Fri, Aug 30, 2019, 5:15 PM UTC

jonnyscholes wrote: post #88

Hamuko wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's apparently an ESLint wrapper that's worth $2000 in console ad revenue.

I've seen this comment and reserved comment a few times but here we go... Sure, Standard on the face of it seems simple technologically, and compared to many other things it is. But it's value lies in completely removing long winded and often unnecessary conversations within teams about code style. Standard represents a standard style of writing JS that has gained widespread support (similar to Airbnb's linter config…

"Just a configuration file" is an odd thing to say. People spend a lot of time thinking about configuration! A coherent option set that makes sense in a range of use cases is actually really valuable.

Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads

#207

Post by ken » Fri, Aug 30, 2019, 5:16 PM UTC

saagarjha wrote: post #180

heyoni wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when are FAANG companies considered to be closed source? Have any of them snatched up maintainers to continue development behind closed doors? There are examples of large corporations hiring maintainers to work on open source and keep those projects open source. I believe pypi is an example of that.

I am fairly certain that Apple has hired people who previously worked on permissively-licensed projects to work on the closed-source fork.

They've certainly hired people to work on open-source projects and keep them open-source (e.g., LLVM, CUPS). What closed-source forks have they made?

Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads

#208

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Aug 30, 2019, 5:18 PM UTC

SquishyPanda23 wrote: post #191

jasode wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>, why is it so alarming to think that these maintainers might think of a clever idea like this to make a couple thousand bucks? [...] But instead of attacking the guy for trying, I really wish the discussion were focussed on how the community of open-source consumers can contribute back to the open source ecosystem You're (possibly unintentionally) distorting/diverting the issue. Nobody is criticizing open source ma…

Open source project funding is a major open problem, which is something many people agree on. It can't sustain if we don't solve that. What I don't see is the fairness argument. Developers have legal means to restrict commercial use of their software. The community has for decades had a conversation about licensing and none of this is new territory. These developers chose to volunteer their time to corporations. If t…

[deleted]

Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads

#209

Post by yebyen » Fri, Aug 30, 2019, 5:18 PM UTC

SquishyPanda23 wrote: post #191

jasode wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>, why is it so alarming to think that these maintainers might think of a clever idea like this to make a couple thousand bucks? [...] But instead of attacking the guy for trying, I really wish the discussion were focussed on how the community of open-source consumers can contribute back to the open source ecosystem You're (possibly unintentionally) distorting/diverting the issue. Nobody is criticizing open source ma…

Open source project funding is a major open problem, which is something many people agree on. It can't sustain if we don't solve that. What I don't see is the fairness argument. Developers have legal means to restrict commercial use of their software. The community has for decades had a conversation about licensing and none of this is new territory. These developers chose to volunteer their time to corporations. If t…

> These developers chose to volunteer their time to corporations.

Not so, these developers chose to volunteer their time to benefit the commons, and corporations occupy the same spaces once in a while. Whether or not there are abusive companies who stake out those projects for rent-seeking, to build walled gardens of their own, looting the commons making money for themselves and giving nothing back, is really not a function of the person who did something good for everyone's benefit.

We shouldn't be asking the person who is doing the good thing to change, friend! Reciprocity is an evolutionarily acquired trait, and while you can't count on favors to be repaid all of the time, anyway this is not a requirement in order for us to benefit from reciprocity.

Students of psychology have understood this as one of the favorable characteristics of human behavior which enabled us to survive up to this point. The idea that you can give someone something and receive something bigger in return, while both parties benefit, has been a part of community building for as long as humans formed communities. I would like to share this Sandi Metz talk about it in case you have an hour and want to hear more, I'm not the student of Psychology and didn't make this stuff up myself:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzWLGMtXflg

> You're Insufficiently Persuasive by Sandi Metz

Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads

#210

Post by jraph » Fri, Aug 30, 2019, 5:20 PM UTC

_greim_ wrote: post #139

NPM's move to ban the practice is unsurprising. Consider however that NPM has no qualms about showing various nag screens of their own, such as "a new version of NPM is available," etc. Perhaps they should consider taking leadership in the OSS funding space. "Hey, it looks like you're enjoying these packages x, y, and z! Click here to donate to your favorite OSS projects." Or something.

A software update notice cannot be considered as an ad, can it?