3 ms·
I would agree to most of those conclusions. If a project is created as a recreational activity, as something a person is doing because they enjoy programming an
by belorn 6y ago
I would agree to most of those conclusions. If a project is created as a recreational activity, as something a person is doing because they enjoy programming and is filling a personal need, then that is the payment in itself. Recreational activities may be identical with professional activity in terms of code, and some people can turn an recreational project into their way of earning a living. If it however stop being recreational then forcing yourself to do it would just be working for free unless you convert into getting paid as an professional.
- sangnoir 6y agoI agree with you, I would argue that free software/open source developers are the ones who feel entitled to an income based sorely on the size of the audience they amass. Something of incredible value was lost when Free Software was corporatized into Open Source, and instead of "True believers", we had more open-source-as-marketing. I am a frequent user of libre software, and I do it without paying (how many have donated to VLC, yet directly or indirectly depend on it or FFMPEG? Even closed-source applications remotely related to video likely depend on it one way or another). I pay it pack by contributing to open projects and making them better - granted, I have a day job that gives me this flexibility. It would be a dark day (IMHO), if all open projects were to depend on the benevolence of F500s.