3 ms·
You're not wrong, but the reason is more fundamental: open source and open protocols do not have an economic model sufficient to finance the immense amount of b
by api 6y ago
You're not wrong, but the reason is more fundamental: open source and open protocols do not have an economic model sufficient to finance the immense amount of brutal work required to make products that are easy to use and appealing for the general public. FOSS and open systems will always lose (outside nerds and certain power user audiences) because closed systems have an economic model in the form of either paid SaaS, commercial licenses, advertising, or surveillance capitalism (or some mix of these things).
... or in the case of Parler perhaps paid propaganda financing from far-right wealthy financiers...? Of course political propaganda is a form of advertising so it fits under the adware / surveillanceware category.
In software, making something work in the algorithmic and technical sense is usually less than a quarter of the work. In the case of social networks and chat apps and similar stuff it's probably only a single digit percentage of the work. The vast majority of the work is in the domain of user interface, user experience, and product design.
Even worse, this is usually the type of work that programmers don't enjoy. It involves endless tweaking, endless rewrites of user interfaces to hone in on something people like or to chase trends, and the soul crushing drudgery of bug fixes and workarounds to edge cases. Because this work is not fun, people generally must be paid to do it. Because it's the majority of the work, the cost of paying people to do it dwarfs the cost of building the technical underpinnings of the product.
I used to think that the failure of decentralization was a technical problem. I wasn't totally wrong there either. There are major technical challenges around decentralization, but I've realized since then that the lack of an economic driver to finance the UI/UX aspects are the real issue. This issue is not solvable because nobody is willing to actually pay for software.
- jchanimal 6y agoDoes anyone else think building product is not that hard? You make or break on the Alpha release when the direction of the product is set. The hard work comes after you know you’ve got a good bet.
- dgb23 6y agoAside: Some people pay tons of money for software due to addictive game design, social and UX patterns. But I agree. Building good UX is hard, iterative work and requires a connection of right and left brain thinking via communication or generalists. Graphic, UI, UX and game designers are typically not as engaged with open source as programmers and engineers. Is this a cultural issue or is it inherent? Ultimately any given UI is a concretion, but I've noticed a strong trend to abstraction in these fields. Design Systems/Language, Design Thinking and so on. I mean the term "UX" is in of itself an abstraction. And the digital tools that designers use today are much more powerful and varied than just a decade ago. Maybe it is a matter of time until there is more engagement in open source from the design world.