5 ms·

I would pay for its development but the end result must be free software. If we don't then I think we're being disrespectful to the developers who's work we're

I would pay for its development but the end result must be free software. If we don't then I think we're being disrespectful to the developers who's work we're building upon but I might be alone in that opinion. I hold that opinion for Linux but not the web. It feels somewhat hypocritical though.

ohlookarabbit 7y ago
You are not alone with this opinion. It has to be free software (free speech, not free beer).
- bigfudge 7y ago
  I'm in this boat too, having bought lots of software but been burned by products disappearing/being neglected. In buying sftware, in my experience, the real cost is in my time learing/mastering it. The ultimate example here is a text editor. If sublime was free as in speech I would still be paying to use it. As it is, I lost confidence that team could maintain it long term and have switched to Atom. What good models are there for free speech consumer/individual developer software to actually make money?
  - ohlookabird 7y ago
    In my experience of the last few years working as a senior software engineer in both public and private research institutions, one way to do free software development professionally is this: Find a niche in a research field and try to work in either research labs, scientific computing departments or get a maintenance grant from a foundation (e.g. CZI). Maybe I am lucky, but it seems that FLOSS is generally welcomed and the trend goes to more support. It also provides you ways to communicate on conferences, etc talking directly to many users (researchers).
groovebits 7y ago
I wouldn't say somewhat, it is a direct contradiction since web apps are essentially desktop apps nowadays. If the current software practices and technologies were present back in the day, then the GPL would've probably just been the AGPL.

5 ms·

I would pay for its development but the end result must be free software. If we don't then I think we're being disrespectful to the developers who's work we're

by drenvuk 7y ago

ohlookarabbit 7y ago
You are not alone with this opinion. It has to be free software (free speech, not free beer).
- bigfudge 7y ago
  I'm in this boat too, having bought lots of software but been burned by products disappearing/being neglected. In buying sftware, in my experience, the real cost is in my time learing/mastering it. The ultimate example here is a text editor. If sublime was free as in speech I would still be paying to use it. As it is, I lost confidence that team could maintain it long term and have switched to Atom. What good models are there for free speech consumer/individual developer software to actually make money?
  - ohlookabird 7y ago
    In my experience of the last few years working as a senior software engineer in both public and private research institutions, one way to do free software development professionally is this: Find a niche in a research field and try to work in either research labs, scientific computing departments or get a maintenance grant from a foundation (e.g. CZI). Maybe I am lucky, but it seems that FLOSS is generally welcomed and the trend goes to more support. It also provides you ways to communicate on conferences, etc talking directly to many users (researchers).
groovebits 7y ago
I wouldn't say somewhat, it is a direct contradiction since web apps are essentially desktop apps nowadays. If the current software practices and technologies were present back in the day, then the GPL would've probably just been the AGPL.