4 ms·

They do need funding or they wouldn't put ads in node modules. They wouldn't sell popular packages to bad people to repurpose as malware. These are telltale s

They do need funding or they wouldn't put ads in node modules. They wouldn't sell popular packages to bad people to repurpose as malware. These are telltale signs that open source developers are not being looked after. They are not making ends meet. These are people with popular open source and the reward for open source is not being distributed effectively for popular projects so it's surely much worse for the bottom million projects. And the low-quality stuff is super-important too. Before someone can work at FAANG they need to write good software. Before they can write good software they're going to practice writing all kinds of dumb shit and good stuff building the experience and knowledge required to invent a kubernetes. The time investment to obtain the skillset to work for FAANG is years. It requires hardware and connectivity. The problem with it coming to a grinding halt is we're obviously not finished yet. In ten years React should be in the trash like literally everything that preceded it is. We might still be using Flash if we were finished. Its syntax sure looks like it lent TypeScript some ideas. What if software genius like Torvalds isn't even rare and we're still just too stupid to foster and enable it for common good...

root_axis 7y ago
> They do need funding or they wouldn't put ads in node modules That's a tautology. They decided to monetize their open-source work through ads. I don't disagree with this approach, if users don't like the ads then don't use the software. That doesn't mean companies need to arbitrarily fund that project. > Before they can write good software they're going to practice writing all kinds of dumb shit and good stuff building the experience and knowledge required to invent a kubernetes. So what? They can write lots of practice software and not open-source it. Why should anyone be paying for them to do so? > The problem with it coming to a grinding halt is we're obviously not finished yet. In ten years React should be in the trash like literally everything that preceded it is. We might still be using Flash if we were finished. Its syntax sure looks like it lent TypeScript some ideas. If it should be so then it will be so. People will write software if there is a need for it. There is no inherent reason why React "should" be in the trash in 10 years, it will be in the trash only if new problems need to be solved and if they do someone will attempt to solve them.

root_axis 7y ago

> They do need funding or they wouldn't put ads in node modules That's a tautology. They decided to monetize their open-source work through ads. I don't disagree with this approach, if users don't like the ads then don't use the software. That doesn't mean companies need to arbitrarily fund that project. > Before they can write good software they're going to practice writing all kinds of dumb shit and good stuff building the experience and knowledge required to invent a kubernetes. So what? They can write lots of practice software and not open-source it. Why should anyone be paying for them to do so? > The problem with it coming to a grinding halt is we're obviously not finished yet. In ten years React should be in the trash like literally everything that preceded it is. We might still be using Flash if we were finished. Its syntax sure looks like it lent TypeScript some ideas. If it should be so then it will be so. People will write software if there is a need for it. There is no inherent reason why React "should" be in the trash in 10 years, it will be in the trash only if new problems need to be solved and if they do someone will attempt to solve them.