4 ms·
Do people think companies would pay for a closed-source glibc if it were shown to be 100% compatible with the current glibc, but written in Rust?
by wspeirs 11y ago
Do people think companies would pay for a closed-source glibc if it were shown to be 100% compatible with the current glibc, but written in Rust?
- d0mine 11y agoThe issue with is that if you substitute social norms with money; it is hard to return to social norms later I.e., if you start paying; you have to continue paying. Predictably Irrational http://whistlinginthewind.org/2013/01/15/predictably-irrational-chapter-4-the-cost-of-social-norms/ http://whistlinginthewind.org/2013/01/15/predictably-irratio...
- wspeirs 11y agoWhat's wrong with continuing to pay? All the time companies pay for support for open source software because they want the "insurance" of having someone to call when the $hit hits the fan. You don't want to pay anymore, go back to glibc...
- chipsy 11y agoTrue of an individual company or business unit and its major tech decisions, but businesses ultimately die. Thus we have a world where Cobol coexists with Node.js - companies saddled with old software never pay for a new system until it's "beyond too late". But a company with a greenfield project can come in and use whatever hot, hyped-up thing is out there, and it usually in their direct interest if it's free, because at that point they probably aren't terribly concerned about software quality.
- Eridrus 11y agoNo. No-one gets fired for using glibc, no-one stops buying a product when every product on the market is vulnerable. But Google does run a security-engineering focussed bounty program: https://www.google.com/about/appsecurity/patch-rewards/ https://www.google.com/about/appsecurity/patch-rewards/ So if you're looking for some smaller scale rewards, that might help.
- alexnewman 11y agono