3 ms·

That's true. When the concept of open source software was first introduced, it was seen as a desperate way to get users but it was an effective strategy at the

That's true. When the concept of open source software was first introduced, it was seen as a desperate way to get users but it was an effective strategy at the time. Today, giving software for free is not enough - I think that the next trend will be to pay people to use your OSS software. Probably with cryptocurrency.

boomboomsubban 8y ago
>When the concept of open source software was first introduced, it was seen as a desperate way to get users but it was an effective strategy at the time This was not the motive for free software's beginning, nor does it describe the beginning of the term "open source." The concept rose out of early computing allowing and sometimes encouraging users to share and improve software, and the true start of the movement envisioned a model similar to Red Hat, where the software is sold though sharing is not restricted. Forcing user payment is effectively impossible for open source software, someone can just buy a copy and redistribute it without the required payment, so your prediction is a movement away from open source software.
- Avamander 8y ago
  Forcing is not possible indeed. But I think this is comparable to the tax system, not everyone contributes equally or as they should but most public utilities still work from those people's contributions who are honest. It's kind-of depressing to think about people trying their best to freeload instead of paying a (symbolic) price, don't you think?
  - boomboomsubban 8y ago
    >It's kind-of depressing to think about people trying their best to freeload instead of paying a (symbolic) price, don't you think? Not particularly. It's depressing to see businesses profitably exploit that work, and irritating to see people develop a sense of entitlement without ever contributing back. Though I wish more general users donated to projects, people using the software without paying seems better than people not using or paying for the software, and far better than paying and being unable to use the software.
  - pdimitar 8y ago
    Depressing it is but I found this way of thinking self-destructive. We cannot change the fact that most people view themselves as the best hagglers ever. It is probably the only area in their lives where they have actual influence. Maybe if the system in general was not so cut-throat there would be less hagglers (although I kind of doubt it; for many people it's their air and water). In the end it's about what choice you make. If you choose to help the community then you must be prepared that it will be a thankless and hard job. If you cannot bear it, don't help the community. Trouble with open source is, many people don't realize this phenomena until they are burned out.

boomboomsubban 8y ago

>When the concept of open source software was first introduced, it was seen as a desperate way to get users but it was an effective strategy at the time This was not the motive for free software's beginning, nor does it describe the beginning of the term "open source." The concept rose out of early computing allowing and sometimes encouraging users to share and improve software, and the true start of the movement envisioned a model similar to Red Hat, where the software is sold though sharing is not restricted. Forcing user payment is effectively impossible for open source software, someone can just buy a copy and redistribute it without the required payment, so your prediction is a movement away from open source software.

Avamander 8y ago
Forcing is not possible indeed. But I think this is comparable to the tax system, not everyone contributes equally or as they should but most public utilities still work from those people's contributions who are honest. It's kind-of depressing to think about people trying their best to freeload instead of paying a (symbolic) price, don't you think?
- boomboomsubban 8y ago
  >It's kind-of depressing to think about people trying their best to freeload instead of paying a (symbolic) price, don't you think? Not particularly. It's depressing to see businesses profitably exploit that work, and irritating to see people develop a sense of entitlement without ever contributing back. Though I wish more general users donated to projects, people using the software without paying seems better than people not using or paying for the software, and far better than paying and being unable to use the software.
- pdimitar 8y ago
  Depressing it is but I found this way of thinking self-destructive. We cannot change the fact that most people view themselves as the best hagglers ever. It is probably the only area in their lives where they have actual influence. Maybe if the system in general was not so cut-throat there would be less hagglers (although I kind of doubt it; for many people it's their air and water). In the end it's about what choice you make. If you choose to help the community then you must be prepared that it will be a thankless and hard job. If you cannot bear it, don't help the community. Trouble with open source is, many people don't realize this phenomena until they are burned out.