4 ms·
2 Important points: 1) In terms of financial remuneration, it's even worse than this. Consider Mastodon, which looks like it's doing pretty well. Well, accordi
by samirillian 7y ago
2 Important points:
1) In terms of financial remuneration, it's even worse than this. Consider Mastodon, which looks like it's doing pretty well. Well, according to his Changelog interview, Eugen also pays 5 moderators to help maintain mastodon.social.
2) Sindre Sorhus, statistically living in poverty, tweeted saying open source was the best decision of his life! Quality of life is increasingly diverging from income. And I hope it continues to, since mean income keeps diverging from median.
- Applejinx 7y agoAbsolutely. I am constantly seeing posters on HN who are clearly far unhappier than me, even though they are pursuing wealth with some success (or even a lot of success). I too am living in relative poverty (sub $1500 a month) and open source was the best risk I ever took. There are some really interesting angles to consider such as the more predictable income of being supported as a working developer, rather than being paid for your 'hit products' and having to generate more hits or starve. Quality of life is also whether you're subject to ruthless pressures. You can trade off income for creative freedom, in a very natural way. Do weird noncommercial stuff if that is more important than maximizing revenue at any given point. There'll be a natural balance between how hard you're trying to please a customer base, and how much that base will reward you for pleasing it.