3 ms·

> I have zero empathy for these companies and their investors. Wow, imagine being so hateful towards amazing open-source tools

systemvoltage 6y ago
Open source tools were developed by the community and they're being harrassed now for monetization. How is that being hateful? I am looking out for the community in this sense.
- botswana99 6y ago
  They are not developed by a 'community'. The developers who build it are paid for by investors. Those investors want a huge return. It's not open source, it's bait and wait
  - cutemonster 6y ago
    Bait and wait and ... But what's step 3? Doesn't seem to work super well, hmm
    - cheriot 6y ago
      MySQL was acquired for 1B. Elastic is currently worth 10B. Redhat was acquired for 34B. What's not working well?
      - cutemonster 6y ago
        Good points. So step 3 can be to do an exit, when the software is really popular. I wonder what's next for Elastic. And mongodb etc. And all their users and customers
  - yagizdegirmenci 6y ago
    Exactly, when you take a look at the mainstream "open-source" projects, you 'll see that those projects are all developed and maintained by some people who gets paid to do that. (e.g. Kubernetes, Firecracker, Gvisor, Bottlerocket, Podman)
- zapita 6y ago
  When open-source companies develop the majority of their product, haters will complain that they’re “not open enough”. When open-source companies invite more contributions from their community, haters will complain that they’re “harassing the community for monetization”. Simply put, some people will never be happy no matter what Docker does, and clearly you are one of them.
  - cutemonster 6y ago
    There's a silent majority size x100? that is happy with both approaches :-) look at Actix-web for example (when the founder quit), the happy but silent people were like 500x more than the a bit angry ones
zemo 6y ago
being open-source is not a magical shield against criticism

systemvoltage 6y ago

Open source tools were developed by the community and they're being harrassed now for monetization. How is that being hateful? I am looking out for the community in this sense.

botswana99 6y ago
They are not developed by a 'community'. The developers who build it are paid for by investors. Those investors want a huge return. It's not open source, it's bait and wait
- cutemonster 6y ago
  Bait and wait and ... But what's step 3? Doesn't seem to work super well, hmm
  - cheriot 6y ago
    MySQL was acquired for 1B. Elastic is currently worth 10B. Redhat was acquired for 34B. What's not working well?
    - cutemonster 6y ago
      Good points. So step 3 can be to do an exit, when the software is really popular. I wonder what's next for Elastic. And mongodb etc. And all their users and customers
- yagizdegirmenci 6y ago
  Exactly, when you take a look at the mainstream "open-source" projects, you 'll see that those projects are all developed and maintained by some people who gets paid to do that. (e.g. Kubernetes, Firecracker, Gvisor, Bottlerocket, Podman)
zapita 6y ago
When open-source companies develop the majority of their product, haters will complain that they’re “not open enough”. When open-source companies invite more contributions from their community, haters will complain that they’re “harassing the community for monetization”. Simply put, some people will never be happy no matter what Docker does, and clearly you are one of them.
- cutemonster 6y ago
  There's a silent majority size x100? that is happy with both approaches :-) look at Actix-web for example (when the founder quit), the happy but silent people were like 500x more than the a bit angry ones

zemo 6y ago

being open-source is not a magical shield against criticism