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

On paying for software

seths.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 279 posts

Re: On paying for software

#221

Post by ghaff »

js8 wrote: post #220

I was thinking about this recently, maybe FOSS isn't quite ideal for the developers. As long as nobody is compensated, it is very fair system. But if somebody gets compensated for their work, then if their work depends on other people's work for free, the other people not being compensated is not fair. For example, consider somebody producing Youtube videos using FOSS. They are compensated, yet the authors of the too…

>FOSS basically started as a radical revolt against copyright system

FOSS depends on the copyright system in order to operate. If you don't have rights to created works you have no rights to impose reciprocal obligations on downstream users.

Re: On paying for software

#222

Post by Bromskloss »

andrei_says_ wrote: post #211
kazinator wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is actually completely backwards in an ironic way. I have found in the past that when I made a program closed source, for sale, all further incentive to do anything to the program became connected to its revenue. Like, "it hasn't generated any meaningful revenue, so I cannot justify spending another N hours on it unless those hours lead to sales." Most software that you can buy has little or no revenue, which me…

Alfie Kohn’s Punished by Rewards provided hundreds of sources, tested and re-tested proof, and description of experiments proving over and over again that for humans, extrinsic rewards kill intrinsic motivation . If you want your child who loves drawing to stop loving it, reward them. If you want them to stop learning, tie a reward to their learning. It’s very simple, really. Being able to receive sustainable income…

> If you want your child who loves drawing to stop loving it, reward them. If you want them to stop learning, tie a reward to their learning.

Is there a way to achieve the opposite?

> Being able to receive sustainable income for doing what you love doing, is a different formula though.

What is the difference?

Re: On paying for software

#223

Post by Torwald »

ttoinou wrote: post #117
Torwald wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, maybe you still have a point. What then, would be the threshold for saying: now, at this point, the costs of X are not marginal anymore but substantial enough to be taken into account?

Depends on what you are thinking about ? Such cost always need to be taken into account, but IMHO in general we must always differentiate material things (that are formed from matter and its organization) and information (i.e. concept of entropy, ideas, thoughts, songs, language, jokes etc..) which have temporary physical supports but exists apart from them

Good distinction, I agree. This leads me to this: If, for example a song, is not written down anywhere, but some brains contain it, this means there some people who could reproduce this song by singing it, this song would still exist. Is a brain a temporal physical support unit in our sense?

Re: On paying for software

#224

Post by ttoinou »

Torwald wrote: post #223
ttoinou wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on what you are thinking about ? Such cost always need to be taken into account, but IMHO in general we must always differentiate material things (that are formed from matter and its organization) and information (i.e. concept of entropy, ideas, thoughts, songs, language, jokes etc..) which have temporary physical supports but exists apart from them

Good distinction, I agree. This leads me to this: If, for example a song, is not written down anywhere, but some brains contain it, this means there some people who could reproduce this song by singing it, this song would still exist. Is a brain a temporal physical support unit in our sense?

Yes of course. As long as we have electricity in our brains we can store and process information. The very precise implementation of this would require to study biology (it's already interesting to see that we run on electricity like computers!).

Re: On paying for software

#225

Post by _dps »

andrei_says_ wrote: post #211
kazinator wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is actually completely backwards in an ironic way. I have found in the past that when I made a program closed source, for sale, all further incentive to do anything to the program became connected to its revenue. Like, "it hasn't generated any meaningful revenue, so I cannot justify spending another N hours on it unless those hours lead to sales." Most software that you can buy has little or no revenue, which me…

Alfie Kohn’s Punished by Rewards provided hundreds of sources, tested and re-tested proof, and description of experiments proving over and over again that for humans, extrinsic rewards kill intrinsic motivation . If you want your child who loves drawing to stop loving it, reward them. If you want them to stop learning, tie a reward to their learning. It’s very simple, really. Being able to receive sustainable income…

I haven't read the material in a while but I think this was sensitive to framing. That is, I don't think it's exactly true that attaching a reward to something harms performance — I think one has to frame the task as being done for the purpose of the reward. If I am remembering this correctly, then emphasizing someone's intrinsic motivation while also providing an extrinsic reward should be ok.

If you happen to remember the material well enough to clarify on this point I would appreciate it :)

Re: On paying for software

#226

Post by ghaff »

terragon wrote: post #216
user5994461 wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expect 500 euros per day for a cheap developer in Eastern Europe. Maybe similar for Indian outsourcing or Latin American. Expect over a 1000 dollars per day for a qualified developer in a first world location. Point being. No individual can pay that much and the develop should rather get a day job unless the software has high earning potential.

Which developer in a first world country has 30k a month in salary? $1000 a day is beyond ridiculous!

For a qualified contractor? $100 per billable hour is extremely reasonable. They're not on the clock all the time. When I did consulting work (not writing software but tech-related) I charged way more than that although it was usually based on jobs rather than hours.

ADDED: And, if you're contracting through a larger firm, they're adding various overheads associated with managing the project, etc.

Re: On paying for software

#227

Post by molotovbliss »

wazoox wrote: post #168
TimJYoung wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, donations, etc. may work for some creators, but they will not work for all. There are always going to be products that are "Wow, I'm donating to her !", but the vast majority are more of the "plumbing" variety that are much, much harder to monetize in ways other than "pay me".

You seem to forgot that most independent developers don't make money, period. The fact that your app is open source or not is only marginally related to the fact that it earns you a living. Thousands upon thousands developed applications for desktop or mobile or whatever and simply cant' make end meet . Believing that because your app has a sticker price on it will make you money is an illusion . I hire some dev inte…

Any software I have used and found to be a tool I've relied on, I have purchased a licence for at some point in time. Granted this is when I've been comfortable financially. If it comes down to eating or paying for a software license is obvious. But to keep being a tight ass after you're more than able is just crappy. Especially since as a dev you should be able to relate to those dedicated to their craft & realize they too could be struggling financially. I do find smaller orgs more enticing than say a Photoshop license as an example, of the pricing is high for using on occasions. That said being a solely design or front end type that's something you'd use and rely on to make money on. It's really that case (for me at least) if it's used for profit it should be profitable for the creators. However I've also been a musician too who believes strongly on the opposite. Music should be free to individuals and paid for up corporations. The same model is great for open source like redhat (centos) or Magento that offer enterprise license that mean dedicated support. My point being as an individual it's hard to justify at times, but for organizations it should be obvious to licensed.

Having paid for sublime and PHP storm, both have vim modes. But I prefer nano (yes I'm one of those lol ;-) )

Re: On paying for software

#228

Post by ghaff »

copesc wrote: post #187
jcoffland wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gina Häußge is the only one making reasonable money on Patron for a software project, last I checked. I exchanged several emails with her about this very topic. Despite her success in fund raising, even she was concerned about the long-term viability of this sort of funding. I also am the author of an active Open-Source project. I accept donations but they have never amounted to much.

Sindre Sorhus has a successful Patreon as well: https://www.patreon.com/sindresorhus but he's kind of a unicorn (pun intended). I am sure this would not work for everyone.

And $3500 per month is not what a lot (most?) people here would consider a successful financial model even given some consulting etc. on top of that. It depends on where you live of course but bringing in $50K per year (with no benefits) or so in donations is not something a lot of professionals--especially those qualified to work for major software companies--would consider a sustainable income stream.

Re: On paying for software

#229

Post by js8 »

ghaff wrote: post #221
js8 wrote: post #220

I was thinking about this recently, maybe FOSS isn't quite ideal for the developers. As long as nobody is compensated, it is very fair system. But if somebody gets compensated for their work, then if their work depends on other people's work for free, the other people not being compensated is not fair. For example, consider somebody producing Youtube videos using FOSS. They are compensated, yet the authors of the too…

>FOSS basically started as a radical revolt against copyright system FOSS depends on the copyright system in order to operate. If you don't have rights to created works you have no rights to impose reciprocal obligations on downstream users.

It kinda does, but it's an open question whether it's a requirement.

In recent years, many programs became BSD-like licensed and it didn't impede the availability of their source code. Similarly, in the world of Minecraft, many mods started closed-source but free, and eventually became open-sourced, because it turned out to be beneficial on its own.

I actually like the free software philosophy, but it might be that the copyleft clause is not required if there is enough rational self-interest. However, in the current copyright system (where the copyright lasts effectively forever), this self-interest commands to hoard the source code (for the duration of the copyright).

Re: On paying for software

#230

Post by Torwald »

ttoinou wrote: post #224
Torwald wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good distinction, I agree. This leads me to this: If, for example a song, is not written down anywhere, but some brains contain it, this means there some people who could reproduce this song by singing it, this song would still exist. Is a brain a temporal physical support unit in our sense?

Yes of course. As long as we have electricity in our brains we can store and process information. The very precise implementation of this would require to study biology (it's already interesting to see that we run on electricity like computers!).

Ok, cool, now, how is the number eight, for instance. Does it exist only because human brains have it in it? Or do numbers exist in the universe outside our brains? Can we answer this? This would be an important step in IP rights and all that…
Post reply on HN