4 ms·

What does “public” mean in this context? And if you want this thing, why don’t you make it?

samatman 6y ago
Everyone knows that there's a huge gap between wanting something to exist, and wanting something to exist, while having the expertise, time, resources, and will, to bring it into existence. Since you know this as well as I do, I want to ask: what is your motive in asking this question?
- burrows 6y ago
  First, I dig your meditation on Forth and the Dao that won’t be named. > what is your motive in asking this question? To provoke OP into debugging me.
  - samatman 6y ago
    thanks, glad you enjoyed it!
anigbrowl 6y ago
Public means non-profit and wholly transparent, explicitly dedicated to the creation and expansion of a software commons. It infuriates me that people who work on important projects like numpy or Tor which are very widely used have trouble paying the bills and keeping a roof over their head. I don't make it because I don't work in the software industry and don't have access to large social or financial capital networks. That sounds a bit like asking why someone who proposes a public policy idea doesn't just run for President.
- burrows 6y ago
  > It infuriates me that people who work on important projects like numpy or Tor which are very widely used have trouble paying the bills and keeping a roof over their head. Donate money to projects you care about. Persuade your friends to donate. > I don't make it because I don't work in the software industry and don't have access to large social or financial capital networks. What’s the plan for getting the doers onboard? Pay them? Persuade them to work for free? Persuade the government to tax someone else to fund them? Or are we just shouting about things we don’t like? Because let me tell you about low quality leather goods...
- Noos 6y ago
  The problem is that this what you get when you make a commons without reciprocity or equality. Reciprocity means the producer/upkeeper and consumer each put something into the commons that balances out mutual needs. if only a few people can create or maintain, the many users must contribute in a lesser fashion to enable them. Equality means that everyone create or maintain, so the burden isn't shared on a small group. If we are all farmers, we can each handle a share of a common field. But this kind of commons is asymmetrical, and that's why you'll never see people pay the bills anywhere near close to the need. This kind of common can really only be noblesse oblige, where people with abundant resources give charity. It isn't, so people struggle.
  - burrows 6y ago
    The idea of "everyone" owning something, ie a commons, is a contradiction. If everyone owns it, then no one owns it. Assume the thing has exactly one owner. Then "reciprocity" and "equality" are addressed by the owner charging a fee to use the thing. Currency exchanged by consumers compensates the owner-operator's work.

Everyone knows that there's a huge gap between wanting something to exist, and wanting something to exist, while having the expertise, time, resources, and will, to bring it into existence. Since you know this as well as I do, I want to ask: what is your motive in asking this question?

burrows 6y ago
First, I dig your meditation on Forth and the Dao that won’t be named. > what is your motive in asking this question? To provoke OP into debugging me.
- samatman 6y ago
  thanks, glad you enjoyed it!

anigbrowl 6y ago

Public means non-profit and wholly transparent, explicitly dedicated to the creation and expansion of a software commons. It infuriates me that people who work on important projects like numpy or Tor which are very widely used have trouble paying the bills and keeping a roof over their head. I don't make it because I don't work in the software industry and don't have access to large social or financial capital networks. That sounds a bit like asking why someone who proposes a public policy idea doesn't just run for President.

burrows 6y ago
> It infuriates me that people who work on important projects like numpy or Tor which are very widely used have trouble paying the bills and keeping a roof over their head. Donate money to projects you care about. Persuade your friends to donate. > I don't make it because I don't work in the software industry and don't have access to large social or financial capital networks. What’s the plan for getting the doers onboard? Pay them? Persuade them to work for free? Persuade the government to tax someone else to fund them? Or are we just shouting about things we don’t like? Because let me tell you about low quality leather goods...
Noos 6y ago
The problem is that this what you get when you make a commons without reciprocity or equality. Reciprocity means the producer/upkeeper and consumer each put something into the commons that balances out mutual needs. if only a few people can create or maintain, the many users must contribute in a lesser fashion to enable them. Equality means that everyone create or maintain, so the burden isn't shared on a small group. If we are all farmers, we can each handle a share of a common field. But this kind of commons is asymmetrical, and that's why you'll never see people pay the bills anywhere near close to the need. This kind of common can really only be noblesse oblige, where people with abundant resources give charity. It isn't, so people struggle.
- burrows 6y ago
  The idea of "everyone" owning something, ie a commons, is a contradiction. If everyone owns it, then no one owns it. Assume the thing has exactly one owner. Then "reciprocity" and "equality" are addressed by the owner charging a fee to use the thing. Currency exchanged by consumers compensates the owner-operator's work.