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

Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

propublica.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 469 posts

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#451

Post by jordigh »

gabemart wrote: post #408
jordigh wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wonder sometimes if this is the legacy that RMS was thinking about. No. Free software was never about no money being involved. In fact, RMS himself used to get a lot of money by selling free software. Back in the day when Emacs was too big for the internet, RMS used to sell Emacs tapes at 100 USD each (with documentation and source code, of course). In fact, he still thinks that you should be charging money for d…

> I have really hoped that the current app store model would turn out to be a great way to sell free software. A convenient way to pay, and you can download and install whatever you want. Optionally, you can have a link to the source code. > Sadly, it doesn't seem to be happening this way. I don't understand why not. Perhaps I too am being too idealistic. As an indie app developer, I already struggle with people ripp…

I think issuing trademark infringements notices is fine as far as handling this problem for free software.

If people want to bundle "my" GNU Octave and modify it randomly delete the users hard drive, that's ok. Free software allows this. Just don't call it GNU Octave, call it GNU DiskDestroyer or something.

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#452

Post by timonovici »

nanofortnight wrote: post #207
ryaniscool wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.fsf.org/about/financial The FSF had revenue of 1.25 million in 2013. I'm not trying to comment on where it came from or where it went to. I'm only pointing out that they are not in a very similar position.

So… enough pay for about 20 developers?

More like 8 or 10. There are costs beside that: hardware, hosting, office, internet, etc. etc. The math doesn't work that way ;)

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#453

Post by olau »

wooger wrote: post #430
72deluxe wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting with the Outreach programme in GNOME (I think that's what it's called), because if you periodically look at planet.gnome.org, there are interesting things going on with developers within that outreach programme. But there are also justified backlashes to the programme, given that there is a perceived priority given to the programme in some areas instead of writing software. The argument is that not e…

Didn't GNOME almost go bust last year and hold an emergency donation drive, due entirely to granting too many paid internships (or similar) to people who aren't established GNOME developers, or even programmers?

No. The GNOME foundation is managing the funds of the outreach program (which doesn't have anything to do with GNOME, really, except it started there), so when some of the sponsors (think big corps) of the outreach programme didn't pay their agreed upon share on time, the foundation ended up in trouble. It was simply a liquidity problem which was solved when they received the sponsorship money.

That's at least how I think it went, you can go look it up, the details are online.

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#454

Post by 72deluxe »

DanBC wrote: post #423
72deluxe wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting with the Outreach programme in GNOME (I think that's what it's called), because if you periodically look at planet.gnome.org, there are interesting things going on with developers within that outreach programme. But there are also justified backlashes to the programme, given that there is a perceived priority given to the programme in some areas instead of writing software. The argument is that not e…

> You don't see such pushes in dentistry, the car industry or anything like that; "Are you a WOMAN? Then join the car industry!". Yes you do. Every single fucking time this comes up someone says "you don't see this in construction". It's rebutted every time it comes up and it's really fucking easy to do a simple web search to find examples of programmes to get men into teaching or nursing or to get women or minoritie…

I wiped your profanity and spittle off my screen.

I haven't seen anything like this here in the UK. Is it a US thing?

BTW, I wasn't advocating for or against in this GNOME argument. I am entirely an observer and was highlighting the arguments made by both.

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#455

Post by 72deluxe »

frenchman99 wrote: post #437
72deluxe wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of interest, what does this senior engineer have to do? Is it C++ or PHP? EDIT: Someone downvoted me, not sure why, but I am genuinely curious what the senior engineer does?

I'd guess that whoever downvoted you thought this was a troll meant to start a flamewar with C++ vs. PHP and whether one or the other is more difficult (read "better" or "a real language"). It's interesting to note though, that Facebook does uses PHP and C++ extensively. And Facebook maintains a large a number of open source PHP and C++ projects. So I suppose that some Facebook engineers are more involved with PHP an…

Ah I hadn't thought of that about the flamewar. I use both languages (now mainly C++ as I don't need to use PHP for the stuff I am writing anymore).

You're right about them using the right tool for the job - their entire HipHop etc. (whatever it is called now) creations to convert PHP to C++ and run a C++ web server are a good indication of this. Good point!

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#456

Post by crpatino »

pyre wrote: post #206
briandear wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's a registered non profit you can donate and 'write it off' too. The idea that a 'big company' should do the donating is short sighted. That big company is made up of individuals. If everyone reading this donated $100, the problem posed by the article would disappear.

My point is that it's probably easier to get a company that is turning a profit off of something to donate a single large sum, than to convince a million people to donate $1.

Beg to disagree.

If your effort is half as good, you still get half million people to donate $1.

On the company case, one million is not pocket change, so this will be a serious decision that has to be approved by several independent branches within the organization, each with veto power. Screw one of those and it's a deal breaker.

Furthermore, I'd say that this decision is one that is particularly difficult to frame for the company. While corporations do understand direct costs very very well, they are practically hardwired to ignore/exploit the gift economy. So the discussion will be stirred towards what indirect benefits will the company receive from donating to a worthy cause (public relations, tax exceptions, etc) and away from the consequences of letting a (unacknowledged) strategic partner to go under.

Not to say that a corporation cannot assume stewardship of a distressed project, but it almost always requires executive fiat to get over the bureaucracy.

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#457

Post by dragonwriter »

crazy1van wrote: post #370
fivedogit wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're our own worst enemies. Software developers have this sort of circular firing squad where nobody wants to be the first to keep their source closed and try to charge for it. Because then you're just "greedy" and not pure enough. But that'll never change unless all of a sudden we say "Ok, on the count of 3, everybody stop giving away their hard-earned expertise for free. 1... 2... 3..." We're like musicians nowada…

> where nobody wants to be the first to keep their source closed and try to charge for it Seems like there's another option -- open source your project and also charge for a license to use it. By open sourcing people will trust it more which will cause its value to go up. And then more people would be willing to pay for it.

> Seems like there's another option -- open source your project and also charge for a license to use it.

If you open source your project, unless you're using an unusual definition of open source, you've provided a free-of-charge, sublicensable license to use, modify, and distribute it. (Or, at least, a license that the licensee is free to sublicense without charging the sublicensee or paying an additional fee to you, so even if you are charging for the direct licenses, the more you sell the greater the probability that it will be available at no charge.)

You could open source it and charge a fee for professional support, however, which is a fairly common model.

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#458

Post by 72deluxe »

72deluxe wrote: post #420
notsony wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Over the next three years, the Linux Foundation will receive a combined total of $3.9 million from Google, Intel, Amazon and others to fund core infrastructure projects such as OpenSSL. Sounds good until you take a step back... > Intel will invest "$300 million to help improve the pipeline for women and minorities, actively support the hiring and retention of diverse candidates, and fund programs that support the pos…

It's interesting with the Outreach programme in GNOME (I think that's what it's called), because if you periodically look at planet.gnome.org, there are interesting things going on with developers within that outreach programme. But there are also justified backlashes to the programme, given that there is a perceived priority given to the programme in some areas instead of writing software. The argument is that not e…

Replying to myself to mention that I am neither for or against the GNOME outreach programme!! - I am entirely an observer! I haven't used GNOME since GNOME2 due to disliking the new interface; I periodically check on there to see what's going on GNOME world and it is quite interesting, both for developments and also for what's going on internally with disagreements and discussions between people.

I thought I ought to add that because I suspect people are thinking that I dislike the programme? Either that or people like down voting with no reply.

With regard to the encouragement for everyone and their dog to take up coding, I see it a lot but in truth I do not see the same things in other professions - I have never seen a push to make youngsters take an interest in banking or journalism yet over here in the UK there is a push to make programming/coding a part of the national curriculum for youngsters, hence the introduction of the Raspberry Pi to encourage that.

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#459

Post by teddyh »

ctdonath wrote: post #443
teddyh wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does Apple figure into this? I did not mention Apple, I was countering the parent’s FUD, which also did not mention Apple.

Just one of many obvious examples that plenty of tools are available "allowing them the freedom to improve their lot." Nobody is stopping them, nobody is "keeping your users under your thumb". Improve your lot? do it yourself, or pay the engineers accordingly. Oh, sure, Apple et al can change their minds and charge outrageous fees and demand outrageous licensing terms. Nonetheless, lots of affordable tools are availa…

Rhetorical question: If nobody is stopping them, there is no harm in giving them the source code, right? So why don’t you?

> I've written format converters (with no guiding documentation) to overcome the bounds you imply.

Please do not assume that everybody should be like yourself.

> If you're paying the price of a few cups of coffee to use it, heck yeah you're not getting the complete body of work a team spent years creating.

There’s an easy way to rectify this – just don’t call it selling. Call it renting, which is what it practically is. The thing which I get when I buy software today is by no practical definition my property: its utility is deliberately limited by the manufacturer, and I am both legally and practically prohibited to extend that limit or repair it.

Re: Email Encryption Software Relies on One Guy, Who Is Going Broke

#460

Post by microcolonel »

I've donated to the project in the past, I wasn't aware of just how far in the hole he was until today.

Also, I just cloned the repository and it's a bit of a mess, if anything I'm ashamed that I haven't been doing anything about it directly.

Post reply on HN