4 ms·

> But whoever gets to be the one doing the "ton of work" that you are asking for needs to be paid, do you agree? I realize that this may be a contrarian positi

by ohazi 6y ago

> But whoever gets to be the one doing the "ton of work" that you are asking for needs to be paid, do you agree? I realize that this may be a contrarian position these days, but no, I don't. As an example, the vast majority of Debian maintainers don't get paid, yet as a community project, it has worked exceedingly well for nearly 30 years. Yes, there are certain notable exceptions like Linus Torvalds getting paid by the Linux Foundation, but this is really not the norm. A lot of big community driven open source projects have managed to work well without serious funding for a long time. Would money help? Sure. But no, I don't think a project like this (even a large one) is doomed without it.

rglullis 6y ago
Oh, yes... the decades-old I can benefit for free from that totally unrelated tech project, why can't I get this one as well? fallacy. Yeah, Debian has volunteers and a lot of people working on it for goodwill. But a project the size of Debian is something where you can get many different contributors who do all sorts of different things and become maintainers of these different subsystems. Couple that with a little fundraising and professionals that work on it because it is something that will benefit them economically (e.g, IT companies that provide services where having a free operating system allows them to commoditize their complements[0]) and it's easy to make it a sustainable operation. None of that applies to what you are asking. There is no business to be had on a "crippled-but-leaner" browser, so no one will have any incentive to work on it for free. And if you are not willing to offer money nor volunteer your time to do it, why do you think others will? What you are wishing is just for someone to work for you to free. It reeks of entitlement. [0]: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy-letter-v/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy-letter-v/
- ohazi 6y ago
  You're putting words into my mouth. I stated that I believe the community would be better off if this existed. I have not asked anyone to go and do this. You asked if I thought it was possible to do this without funding. I do. That seems obvious -- it's been done before without funding, it can be done again. The fact that I think it's possible without funding says nothing about whether I think it's the ideal way for something like this to happen. Debian is not unrelated, I specifically used them as my example because Debian maintainers forked and maintained IceWeasel during their dispute with Mozilla. They are the ones who have done this before. --- > There is no business to be had on a "crippled-but-leaner" browser, so no one will have any incentive to work on it for free. You and I seem to have dramatically different takes on what makes software valuable and what motivates people to work on it. I don't care if there's no business use-case for a "crippled-but-leaner" browser. There's a principled case for it -- Many people would prefer to use a web browser that doesn't have ads baked into the shell. That preference gives the leaner browser value. The fact that some people prefer software like this is what makes that software valuable, regardless of whether anybody can make any money from it. This is a statement of inherent value, not a statement about economic viability. And secondly, > And if you are not willing to offer money nor volunteer your time to do it, why do you think others will? I think that others are likely to do this based on observation. There are people who choose to work on projects like these because they personally prefer software that works a certain way, out of principle. Again, the only statement I'm making here is about the likely existence of people who are willing to do this sort of thing for free, out of principle. I am saying nothing about whether or not they deserve to be paid, and I'm not making any moral argument about who is and isn't entitled to use their work or make demands from them.
  - rglullis 6y ago
    > it's been done before without funding, it can be done again. What has been done, specifically? Do not compare the effort of IceWeasel (and the many mozilla-less forks of Firefox that came at that time: basically just keep a folder with different set of resources and some automated build with a few different variables) with the work of keeping a fork with code that needs be "frozen in time, except for backported CVE fixes". Not only it's a different type of job (the first can be mostly automated, the second requires an ongoing process and effort from highly specialized professionals) it was also required for legal reasons, so it was at best a hurdle and no actual benefit. > I believe that the community would be better off if this existed. Yet, you are not willing to contribute anything to make this happen. You'd be willing to reap the benefits from it, but not to actually put in any effort. Show some willingness to put skin in the game, otherwise all your "beliefs" are nothing but hot air.
    - ohazi 6y ago
      > Yet, you are not willing to contribute anything to make this happen. You'd be willing to reap the benefits from it, but not to actually put in any effort. Show some willingness to put skin in the game, otherwise all your "beliefs" are nothing but hot air. Once again, stop putting words in my mouth. I never said I wouldn't contribute something to make this happen, but this is the second time you've insinuated as much. Enough. I never claimed that this should happen without funding. I stated that I believe it's possible for this to happen without funding. None of those statements are equivalent.
      - rglullis 6y ago
        > I never said I wouldn't contribute something to make this happen, I asked if you are willing to pay, you said no. So let me ask: is there any way that you are willing to contribute? Will you volunteer? Will you review the fork? What is going to be your share of sacrifice to the "community"? Are you going to do this continuously or find a successor? It's not just "funding" that I am talking about. Moreover: if this is so important for you and if you believe that more people share your values, why don't you lead by example and start doing this instead of waiting for others?

by ohazi 6y ago

rglullis 6y ago

Oh, yes... the decades-old I can benefit for free from that totally unrelated tech project, why can't I get this one as well? fallacy. Yeah, Debian has volunteers and a lot of people working on it for goodwill. But a project the size of Debian is something where you can get many different contributors who do all sorts of different things and become maintainers of these different subsystems. Couple that with a little fundraising and professionals that work on it because it is something that will benefit them economically (e.g, IT companies that provide services where having a free operating system allows them to commoditize their complements[0]) and it's easy to make it a sustainable operation. None of that applies to what you are asking. There is no business to be had on a "crippled-but-leaner" browser, so no one will have any incentive to work on it for free. And if you are not willing to offer money nor volunteer your time to do it, why do you think others will? What you are wishing is just for someone to work for you to free. It reeks of entitlement. [0]: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy-letter-v/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy-letter-v/

ohazi 6y ago
You're putting words into my mouth. I stated that I believe the community would be better off if this existed. I have not asked anyone to go and do this. You asked if I thought it was possible to do this without funding. I do. That seems obvious -- it's been done before without funding, it can be done again. The fact that I think it's possible without funding says nothing about whether I think it's the ideal way for something like this to happen. Debian is not unrelated, I specifically used them as my example because Debian maintainers forked and maintained IceWeasel during their dispute with Mozilla. They are the ones who have done this before. --- > There is no business to be had on a "crippled-but-leaner" browser, so no one will have any incentive to work on it for free. You and I seem to have dramatically different takes on what makes software valuable and what motivates people to work on it. I don't care if there's no business use-case for a "crippled-but-leaner" browser. There's a principled case for it -- Many people would prefer to use a web browser that doesn't have ads baked into the shell. That preference gives the leaner browser value. The fact that some people prefer software like this is what makes that software valuable, regardless of whether anybody can make any money from it. This is a statement of inherent value, not a statement about economic viability. And secondly, > And if you are not willing to offer money nor volunteer your time to do it, why do you think others will? I think that others are likely to do this based on observation. There are people who choose to work on projects like these because they personally prefer software that works a certain way, out of principle. Again, the only statement I'm making here is about the likely existence of people who are willing to do this sort of thing for free, out of principle. I am saying nothing about whether or not they deserve to be paid, and I'm not making any moral argument about who is and isn't entitled to use their work or make demands from them.
- rglullis 6y ago
  > it's been done before without funding, it can be done again. What has been done, specifically? Do not compare the effort of IceWeasel (and the many mozilla-less forks of Firefox that came at that time: basically just keep a folder with different set of resources and some automated build with a few different variables) with the work of keeping a fork with code that needs be "frozen in time, except for backported CVE fixes". Not only it's a different type of job (the first can be mostly automated, the second requires an ongoing process and effort from highly specialized professionals) it was also required for legal reasons, so it was at best a hurdle and no actual benefit. > I believe that the community would be better off if this existed. Yet, you are not willing to contribute anything to make this happen. You'd be willing to reap the benefits from it, but not to actually put in any effort. Show some willingness to put skin in the game, otherwise all your "beliefs" are nothing but hot air.
  - ohazi 6y ago
    > Yet, you are not willing to contribute anything to make this happen. You'd be willing to reap the benefits from it, but not to actually put in any effort. Show some willingness to put skin in the game, otherwise all your "beliefs" are nothing but hot air. Once again, stop putting words in my mouth. I never said I wouldn't contribute something to make this happen, but this is the second time you've insinuated as much. Enough. I never claimed that this should happen without funding. I stated that I believe it's possible for this to happen without funding. None of those statements are equivalent.
    - rglullis 6y ago
      > I never said I wouldn't contribute something to make this happen, I asked if you are willing to pay, you said no. So let me ask: is there any way that you are willing to contribute? Will you volunteer? Will you review the fork? What is going to be your share of sacrifice to the "community"? Are you going to do this continuously or find a successor? It's not just "funding" that I am talking about. Moreover: if this is so important for you and if you believe that more people share your values, why don't you lead by example and start doing this instead of waiting for others?