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

“Open source” is broken

christine.website

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 357 posts

Re: “Open source” is broken

#241

Post by rboes »

Operyl wrote: post #145
montroser wrote: post #73

No, it's not broken -- it's thriving. Everyone involved has their own incentives, and gets to make their own decisions about when and where to invest their time and money. Some devs are in it for the passion, some for the experience, some for the challenge, some for the learning, some so their work will live on when they change employers. Startups get to use well-tested community supported libraries and don't have to…

> But that's all part of the deal going in, and everyone is fully aware of all the trade-offs straight from the onset. I think part of the problem here, in all honesty, is that some people just _are not_ aware of the trade-offs upfront. They learn these after getting started, and it bites them in the butt one way or another.

I was going to say this. Most are just looking for some experience outside school/work and next thing you know they are the only one maintaining something big companies rely on.

Re: “Open source” is broken

#243

Post by ericb »

blibble wrote: post #66
mcguire wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And rebuilding your entire company's ecosystem to switch logging libraries is practically free.

as anyone who's maintained a large old java codebase will know: there's adapters for all the popular logging frameworks so they interoperate so yes, it can be

Where do these adapters come from?

Re: “Open source” is broken

#244

Post by rboes »

the_af wrote: post #146
abetusk wrote: post #30

I get a little nervous when the responsibility of incentivizing FOSS is framed as a personal responsibility. Isn't there a deeper conversation to be had about how we allocate resources as a society to help build fundamental infrastructure instead of placing the blame on individual people or corporations on their lack of sponsorship or donation? My apologies if this is flame-bait. I really don't know what the solution…

It's not flame-bait. We, as a society that values FOSS, should fund it, but not at the personal level of "I use this software so I'll pay for its license". FOSS licenses should state nothing about paying for the software. You should not feel bad because you are not paying FOSS at the individual level. Taxes and allocation of funding at a societal level might indeed be the answer.

People that are not software engineers would not support it though, right?

Re: “Open source” is broken

#245

Post by rboes »

esarbe wrote: post #47
wyldfire wrote: post #36

I see lots of sentiment in this thread that amounts to "I didn't know you were going to get rich off of my work." That's anathema to Open Source. How do I know? Check "The Open Source Way" [1]. If you feel uncompensated, use a license that prevents commercial use. [1] https://opensource.com/open-source-way

I get the feeling that you misunderstand the gist of the article. The gist of the article is not "I didn't know you were going to get rich off of my work (and I'm pissed off by that)". The premise is - in my reading - "Don't point the finger at me for writing bad software in my own free time, when you didn't even consider contributing to it and don't try to shift the blame when you have to face the consequences of yo…

I got the first interpretation, but I think yours is what we should be talking about. The responsibility for this bug is not on the maintainer, more so on the company for accepting it into their codebase without any vetting.

Re: “Open source” is broken

#246

Post by perrygeo »

jevoten wrote: post #95
xena wrote: post #3

I'm the author of the post in case you have any questions for me.

> This is why I am very careful about how I make "useful" software and release it to the world without any solid way for me to get paid for my efforts. I simply do not want to be in a situation where my software that I develop as a passion project on the side is holding people's companies together. Isn't this the best position to be in if you want to get paid? "You've built your company on top of my project and now y…

No. It's really not. Every company that has previously obtained your work for free will be offended by having to pay for it. Worst case, you'll be attacked for rent-seeking. Best case, you'll be ignored but your work will used for someone else's profit

I agree with the author: it's time that value be compensated by real financial capital, not empty promises of status in some mythical open source community.

Re: “Open source” is broken

#247

Post by zebraflask »

xena wrote: post #185
zebraflask wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just out of curiosity - I wouldn't use vehicular manslaughter as a point of comparison for open source projects? Is there a reference I'm missing with that part of the comment?

See https://www.theregister.com/2020/03/26/corejs_maintainer_jai... for more context.

Ah. Unfortunate.

Re: “Open source” is broken

#248

Post by mbrodersen »

jck wrote: post #236
mbrodersen wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The companies are paying exactly what the price tag says it is worth: $0. What is so surprising about that? If you want companies to not “freeload” then change the price tag for companies.

I really dislike the way you phrased that. Are you saying that things don't have value unless you have to pay money for them?

I am saying no such thing. Read my comment again. What I am saying is that you get what you ask for. Ask for $0 and that is exactly what you get. So don't act all surprised and start throwing your toys around because the world doesn't work the way you want it to work.

Re: “Open source” is broken

#249

Post by mbrodersen »

Master_Odin wrote: post #230
mbrodersen wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you give away your work for $0 then people/companies will value your work accordingly and pay no more than what is asked. What is so surprising about that? Do you pay more than what is asked for when spending $ yourself?

How many companies paid $0 for log4j2, and then got upset and bashed the authors of it when this bug happened for the cost it caused to their business? People pay nothing for the software, but will expect paid quality support.

They get upset and expect things to be fixed for $0 because that is the value that the OSS maintainer put on his own work. So why is that surprising? It's how a market place works.

Re: “Open source” is broken

#250

Post by mbrodersen »

jchw wrote: post #220
mbrodersen wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a simple solution: make companies pay for it. Don’t give your work away for $0. It isn’t rocket science.

Yeah, except by creating such an obligation, you are essentially throwing out the core concept of something being open source or free software. That's not solving the problem, that's more like giving up on it.

Not at all. I don't think you understand OSS. OSS is about Open Software. Not about free (as in $0) software. The only way to make OSS sustainable is to make companies pay for it.
Post reply on HN