This is a little orthogonal, but I'd really appreciate thoughts on this: Is FOSS a good idea? I've always assumed yes. Think of all the libraries in the Pytho

This is a little orthogonal, but I'd really appreciate thoughts on this: Is FOSS a good idea? I've always assumed yes. Think of all the libraries in the Python ecosystem, for example. I've used them to build tons of things, even a couple of things that made a little money and allowed me to get myself a new laptop. I've written open source projects myself, filed issues and helped fix bugs in others. The code I've written represents a lot of time, and I'm happy to give it away. Think about Linux, and what it has done for the world. I've used it for non-commercial purposes all over the place, and it's made research and teaching I've been involved in much easier; it may have been impossible to achieve many things without it. But recently I've begun to question the idea of FOSS, sparked by Jaron Lanier's concerns. There's something clean about paying someone for their software: you have an entity responsible for the code, you can pay for support, you have recourse if you need it. There are clear incentives and rewards, and money earned is properly redistributed. I know that companies like Google do a lot for FOSS, but it's probable that their contributions are minuscule compared to the monetary value they have extracted from it. The alternative is not closed-source: e.g. with web dev you can provide the source code but charge for licensing, etc. So it's more about "free" vs "non-free" than "open" vs "closed". The idea of people coding for free is quite an odd one. Imagine if the world's graphic designers en masse started providing millions of free designs covering every possible icon and situation? (I'm aware of small examples, but they're not at the scale of OSS). Designers don't do it. You would make a lot of people redundant overnight - not all designers, but a lot of them. What do people think? I can't see how we could have this amazing ecosystem without FOSS... but maybe some kind of transactional funding model is needed to make it sustainable, more secure, etc. My instincts were for FOSS, but there's often a difference between what sounds beautiful conceptually and the problems of how it works in practice. RMS' ideas were very attractive, but then you see the modern world from a musician's point of view and it sucks - the long-term effects of ignoring copyright have been to diminish income for musicians. Whilst I improve my friend's quality of life by giving them a copy of some music, their kids might grow up in a world with less good music as a result. I know the record industry sucked, but free copying is not the only alternative. I'd really appreciate input here, as I have failed to resolved this either way. Thoughts?