Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the past it kinda worked out, because the code of OSS acted as the portfolio of the developers, who would get hired by big corps. (Today with LLMs you have no way of knowing who was the original author) We definitely do not pay enough for the utility we get from OSS. But on the other hand do we want do copyright in code? Also when you pay for something you can hold liable the vendor if things go south (security ho…
In a way it’s good that the equation is so lopsided. A massive part is that software can be replicated infinitely for free. This is why the scale of the value created is so giant. I definitely do think it’s crazy that someone whose software gets dozens of millions of downloads A DAY can end up making less than someone building a mediocre SaaS app and getting acqui-hired 2 years later. For the record, I think the VC -…
Burnout is real for open source maintainers
41–50 of 75 posts
Re: Burnout is real for open source maintainers
#42I find the term "burnout" in context of FOSS quite infuriating, as it is usually being used to invalidate a real problem. Instead of talking about concrete misbehavior by concrete individuals or institutions, "oh that poor guy is suffering from foss burnout" is thrown in, and instantly, any thought or action that might change anything about the situation is stopped and discarded. It depersonalizes a problem that is _…
I think you are doing the post injustice by hijacking it. FOSS maintainers can get a burnout even without toxic users - hard deadlines and the understanding that people really rely on your project can do that to you. e.g.: About 25 years I had developed some blogging software in the style of usemod (single executable, data stored in ./data) for coordination of and reporting about protests on throwaway VMs. This initi…
I believe that post is bullshit written _by_ the oppressor (if you allow me to use that lingo which you won't but I don't care). Hence this is on-topic.
But interesting, isn't it? The moment someone questions the root narrative, someone instantly tries to shut it down with "ackschually unrelated!!11 You're hijacking by not having the desired response" + lots of text I didn't read.
As I said. It seeped into the default thinking of people so that they will defend it even if it is actually against their own best interests.
___
That post is no heartwarming story of resilience or healing or whatever. It's just PR for Google, Microsoft, IBM, PayPal, GoDaddy, and Joyent, enabling them to continue to extract value out of volunteers.
Framing a structural problem as some sort of personal failing that can be solved by just doing even more of what the corps benefit from.
sigh
Re: Burnout is real for open source maintainers
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think you can, which is also why Open Source is effectively dead thanks to AI.
Open Source is a movement of people who want to voluntarily collaborate on and share software. As long as there are people who want to do that, it will continue. I don't see anyone suddenly stopping doing that just because AI exists. Lots of open source projects are banning AI contributions, yet they're chugging along just as before. Honestly I think we're going to see a lot less AI-written code in the future, and mo…
Adding a new filter option for in-product analytics (assuming that data is being captured) is something AI can do reasonably well.
But things like “how should our orchestration layer be architected” isn’t a question of execution, so AI won’t be much use.
Re: Burnout is real for open source maintainers
#44I find the term "burnout" in context of FOSS quite infuriating, as it is usually being used to invalidate a real problem. Instead of talking about concrete misbehavior by concrete individuals or institutions, "oh that poor guy is suffering from foss burnout" is thrown in, and instantly, any thought or action that might change anything about the situation is stopped and discarded. It depersonalizes a problem that is _…
Re: Burnout is real for open source maintainers
#45Corollary: if software requires constant revisions it didn't actually cover the initial problem scope, and degenerated into a high-latency service state-machine powered by coders. =3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-system_effect
Makes sense for small tool like ls, and doesn't for things that are actually complex like the python language or sqlite.
Spiraling complexity often eventually implodes out-of-band ecosystems sooner or later. =3
Re: Burnout is real for open source maintainers
#46If you have a hobby project like writing a blog, crocheting, or almost any other creative hobby, you can dip in and out however it suits you. If you deal with major life events, sicknesses, etc., you can leave the hobby and come back. Nobody is paying you for it, so nobody can complain (maybe the friends who miss you, but it's not actively impacting the real world). Open source is one of those weird things where your…
This is why forks happen. It’s very common for a maintainer to decide they’re stepping away from a project or even that they’re not supporting use cases or bug fixes. Then someone starts a fork and, if they are supporting it better than the original maintainer, the traction moves to that project. This happens all the time.
> It's like if you loved crocheting, but somehow if you stopped crocheting everyone in your city would no longer have clothes and need to walk around naked.
I think this is the fallacy at the center of a lot of these debates. In this analogy, people wouldn’t actually around naked. They’d come up with a new solution. They’d switch to sewn or imported clothes. Maybe some other group steps in and learns how to crochet and takes over.
The messier situations occur when one person simultaneously wants to maintain a tight hold on a project and its community, but the maintainers or the community don’t want to endorse any fork attempts. I’ve written before on HN about how some past attempts to form projects have been met with undue hostility for trying to “steal” someone’s pet project. Even open source communities can be hostile to companies forking projects, like all of the complaints that come up about big tech companies profiting off of their own forks of open software (which removes the burden from upstream maintainers). Another examples is when BambuLabs forked PrusaSlicer and there were years of cheap shots at the company for it (though those went away as everyone remembered that Prusa forked another project to make PrusaSlicer).
I really think maintainers who don’t want to do things should come out and say they don’t want to do those things. Let the communities and companies adapt accordingly. The worst state is this in between that happens some times where the maintainers want to retain tight control over the project and community and they try to give an impression of being the everything-to-everyone maintainer when they secretly hate it. It would be so much better for everyone if maintainers would just come out and say things like “I’m tired of fixing security bugs so everyone be warned, as security issues come out I’ll fix them when I get around to it.”
Re: Burnout is real for open source maintainers
#47This is unironically why the AGPL3 is the best license. No need to worry about "virality" or derivative works or any of that, just set it and forget it. On top of that, corporations will avoid you like the plague, ensuring that your audience is other AGPL3 users.
I've used MIT almost exclusively for anything I've published, under multiple identities, and seems to work fine too. What benefit would AGPL3 give me over MIT, in terms of avoiding burnout? So far, saying "No" or not working for free for companies, been working fine as an approach so far, but always open to hearing even better approaches.
plusnirreg.com (misspelling intentional) is the home page of the license
It's also AGPL compatible!
> Why?
By including the word "NXXXXXX" in a LICENSE file that must be distributed with the software you will ensure:
The software will not be used or hosted by western corporations that promote censorship
The software will not be used or hosted by compromised individuals that promote censorship
Users of the software will be immune to attacks that would result in censorship of others
Re: Burnout is real for open source maintainers
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
When I was a kid, we always had New Year's (read: Christmas) decorations (the maximum that wouldn't be out of place in a mostly Muslim country) on a small park in my neighborhood. One year they never appeared, and people were enraged . The guy the city hired every year had a mob in front of his door. People's letters to the authorities got no answer, so suddenly he apparently became their contact person. I was buying…
That sounds almost surreal. Pretty wild how my model of society doesn't account for this.
Many things in the society depend on volunteer work. Open source software is unusual due to the scale of it. In other parts of the society, when many people depend on the work of a few, some corporate or government bureaucrat will usually assume responsibility. But in open source software, the few are often still volunteers without any formal responsibilities.
Re: Burnout is real for open source maintainers
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
That sounds almost surreal. Pretty wild how my model of society doesn't account for this.
A good way to understand how much we thanklessly rely on some professions, Google pictures of any garbage disposal strike
Re: Burnout is real for open source maintainers
#50If you have a hobby project like writing a blog, crocheting, or almost any other creative hobby, you can dip in and out however it suits you. If you deal with major life events, sicknesses, etc., you can leave the hobby and come back. Nobody is paying you for it, so nobody can complain (maybe the friends who miss you, but it's not actively impacting the real world). Open source is one of those weird things where your…
Which you should happily abandon if you get bored.
If people truly need something fixed, they can fix it themselves, or pay someone to get it fixed.