I'm not good enough to work on open source software • Hacker News Board

Re: I'm not good enough to work on open source software

#31

Post by simonbrown » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 5:39 PM UTC

gcp wrote: post #11

davidw wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was a bit tongue in cheek - I have actually had paying gigs working on open source in the past. But the point about where the money comes from stands - Google's money comes from their proprietary stuff. I actually think something like Google is a pretty good way to produce open source software, by the way, but it's made possible by the money made elsewhere.

I'm not sure it was necessary to refer to the "I'm not good enough" thing. It really has little to nothing to do with your point. Because you've just undermined your own example (Guido Van Rossum / Python / Google) above, it weakens your position. If I get it correctly, your point is that one requires copyright for open source software to be viable, by opening up a revenue stream to support the (free) open source par…

How are they similar? Trademarks just prevent people from using the branding, and just represents a minor hurdle (see CENTOS), while copyright (with a restrictive license) would prevent people using almost anything.

If trademarks are the main protection, the main barrier to entry is branding, not technology.

(IANAL)

Re: I'm not good enough to work on open source software

#32

Post by edwinnathaniel » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 5:57 PM UTC

gte910h wrote: post #25

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Because, as I tried to explain, some projects cannot be done as day jobs, and almost have to be done as open-source nowadays. 2) What day job?

You aren't giving examples of 1 As to 2, If you code, it's a very hot job market out there right now. You make a lot of what seem like handwavey notions that OSS coders should get paid or go on strike or something like that without really convincing why. Most professional coders know what they use daily has some strong OSS roots (then there are other branches which have little involvement there). A subset of them do…

It's a hot job market only in certain area.

Re: I'm not good enough to work on open source software

#33

Post by JoeAltmaier » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 6:04 PM UTC

antirez wrote: post #26

I guess that in some way a lot of companies are taking from open source without giving enough back. Open source is much cheaper than proprietary software to produce, a team of a few guys do the work of what would be a much bigger team in a proprietary software, and there is no need to have a profit, paying the developers is enough, so... if companies using open source would give back even a small amount of money... B…

IF open source is The Way, it wouldn't need subsidizing. It sounds like all utopian arguments: If Only everybody came around to the right way of thinking, we'd all be better off.

Sure its true, but it aint gonna happen.

Re: I'm not good enough to work on open source software

#34

Post by ajross » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 6:04 PM UTC

antirez wrote: post #26

I guess that in some way a lot of companies are taking from open source without giving enough back. Open source is much cheaper than proprietary software to produce, a team of a few guys do the work of what would be a much bigger team in a proprietary software, and there is no need to have a profit, paying the developers is enough, so... if companies using open source would give back even a small amount of money... B…

I don't think resources are really the problem. There's a ton of money out there that pays for full-time open source developers. Basically all the core contributors of all the "serious" projects (i.e. things shipped in high-revenue-producing contexts) are already on staff somewhere.

It's true that there's a much larger population of people (like me) who want to work full time on open source and would take a job if it was offered. But that just gets to what the linked article is talking about: companies don't generally "staff" free software projects with new hires. They hire the projects that already exist.

So basically the solution, if you want one of these jobs, is to get off your butt and make something people want. Then give it away. :)

Re: I'm not good enough to work on open source software

#35

Post by JoeAltmaier » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 6:07 PM UTC

npsimons wrote: post #27

bunderbunder wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it might be instructive to think of what the world was like before the idea of letting people who create intellectual products maintain some ownership of (and therefore be more able to make a living from) their work: - Serfdom was still legal in most of Western Europe. - Professional artists occupied the same social rung as prostitutes. - An intellectual professional's primary option for making a living off h…

I can play this game too: you know what the software industry was like before Microsoft and Apple? EVERYTHING was open source. When you bought a program (if they didn't throw it in for free with the bloody expensive hardware) you ALWAYS got source code. People still sell open source software; I've never understood why people think that commercial software is incompatible with open source. It isn't.

??? What utopian world did you live in? Before Microsoft and Apple was before the Internet. Open Source was a dream, everything was proprietary, software engineers were just Coders.

What does it even mean to say "When you bought a program..." in the context of Open Source? Of course if you paid for it, it isn't open source.

Re: I'm not good enough to work on open source software

#36

Post by chronomex » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 6:30 PM UTC

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #35

npsimons wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can play this game too: you know what the software industry was like before Microsoft and Apple? EVERYTHING was open source. When you bought a program (if they didn't throw it in for free with the bloody expensive hardware) you ALWAYS got source code. People still sell open source software; I've never understood why people think that commercial software is incompatible with open source. It isn't.

??? What utopian world did you live in? Before Microsoft and Apple was before the Internet. Open Source was a dream, everything was proprietary, software engineers were just Coders. What does it even mean to say "When you bought a program..." in the context of Open Source? Of course if you paid for it, it isn't open source.

The very GNU GPL itself explicitly allows code licensed under it to be sold for money. What makes you think that code transferred for money cannot possibly be Free?

Re: I'm not good enough to work on open source software

#37

Post by wmf » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 6:37 PM UTC

npsimons wrote: post #27

bunderbunder wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it might be instructive to think of what the world was like before the idea of letting people who create intellectual products maintain some ownership of (and therefore be more able to make a living from) their work: - Serfdom was still legal in most of Western Europe. - Professional artists occupied the same social rung as prostitutes. - An intellectual professional's primary option for making a living off h…

I can play this game too: you know what the software industry was like before Microsoft and Apple? EVERYTHING was open source. When you bought a program (if they didn't throw it in for free with the bloody expensive hardware) you ALWAYS got source code. People still sell open source software; I've never understood why people think that commercial software is incompatible with open source. It isn't.

Everything was open source, but "everything" wasn't much. There was no VisiCalc, no WordStar, no Sierra adventures. Bill Gates's packaged software business model allowed a lot of new software to be created.

Re: I'm not good enough to work on open source software

#38

Post by JoeAltmaier » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 6:42 PM UTC

chronomex wrote: post #36

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

??? What utopian world did you live in? Before Microsoft and Apple was before the Internet. Open Source was a dream, everything was proprietary, software engineers were just Coders. What does it even mean to say "When you bought a program..." in the context of Open Source? Of course if you paid for it, it isn't open source.

The very GNU GPL itself explicitly allows code licensed under it to be sold for money. What makes you think that code transferred for money cannot possibly be Free?

Don't be silly. If you can't look at it without paying, it isn't open source.

Re: I'm not good enough to work on open source software

#39

Post by jonstjohn » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 7:00 PM UTC

antirez wrote: post #26

I guess that in some way a lot of companies are taking from open source without giving enough back. Open source is much cheaper than proprietary software to produce, a team of a few guys do the work of what would be a much bigger team in a proprietary software, and there is no need to have a profit, paying the developers is enough, so... if companies using open source would give back even a small amount of money... B…

My company, probably like many, uses a majority of open source software but rarely contributes back. As an aspiring open source developer (several projects in the works, not yet released), this has always felt wrong. Honestly, I haven't really raised it much with my company, though. Guilty as charged, although we've made some movement to release a few bits of code under an open license.

Interesting thing is that we currently give 1% of our profits to an environmental program through Patagonia called 1% for the Planet. Maybe we need a 1% for Open Source where companies can be encouraged to contribute developer or $$ to open source projects. Anybody want to work on that?

Re: I'm not good enough to work on open source software

#40

Post by paulhauggis » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 7:11 PM UTC

chronomex wrote: post #36

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

??? What utopian world did you live in? Before Microsoft and Apple was before the Internet. Open Source was a dream, everything was proprietary, software engineers were just Coders. What does it even mean to say "When you bought a program..." in the context of Open Source? Of course if you paid for it, it isn't open source.

The very GNU GPL itself explicitly allows code licensed under it to be sold for money. What makes you think that code transferred for money cannot possibly be Free?

Everyone always says this, but the majority of the community is very much against you making money on it and will destroy any chances if you making any sort of profit by releasing the source for free (which is allowed under the license).