5 ms·

There is one basic thing about open source and market economy: 1. People open source for free. They already do that. So, there is no real need to pay them as t

There is one basic thing about open source and market economy: 1. People open source for free. They already do that. So, there is no real need to pay them as they are willing to do so for free. Greatest minds work for open-sourced projects. 2. If you want to pay/fund/support open source. Great, but these numbers we're talking about (like $1k/mo) are nowhere near what devs make at corporations. I think Funds for Open Source is a great initiative! I just do not think it can be a real alternative to a career path. I think the best open source support is done by big companies who open source their work. For example, Airflow by AirBnb.

ocdtrekkie 6y ago
The problem is that projects by big companies are often encumbered by their business decisions. Companies rarely find privacy profitable, so it's usually the first feature to get rid of, but if they use or need an open source tool that respects privacy, they may pay for it. Funds from tech companies won't alone make open source development sustainable, but it'll help.
- prepend 6y ago
  All projects are encumbered by business decisions. I think open source improves on this problem because now I can fork and extend because a company open sourced something. This is not perfect, but it’s better than when I can’t. I think a better approach is trying to encourage more of a gift economy with people working on stuff for free and sharing it. It’s funny how I’m willing to accept some hair and do work myself as part of a community, but if I have to pay for it, I lose that community motivation. For example, I’m willing to spend time writing up an issue for an OSS project with a test script, etc. but I won’t do that for a commercial company.
cassepipe 6y ago
I would rather make 1k a month and work on something I like on my terms than to have a stressful/meaningless job around the clock with unpaid working hours all around. There only so much shit you really need. And you need time for your friends/loved one. You'll live poorer but longer. Edit : This is not a fantasy about poverty being more genuine. Poverty makes you die sooner. My point is a life spent running after money and positions is a meaningless life. Edit 2: I may have a bias here since I live with under 1k a month, under my country's minimum wage that is .
- breakfastduck 6y ago
  Appreciate that's the case for you, but under 1k in either the UK or US or many European countries is completely untenable for independent living.
  - cassepipe 6y ago
    I live in Paris so it's quite expensive. Not making a case about my lifestyle which is quite spartan I admit but I am tired of reading people complaining they can't make a living with only 3k a month, like my father, which feels kind of obscene to me. The reason my father is complaining about his financial situation all the time is because is always trying to buy shit to compensate the time he lost doing the job he doesn't like. It all ends up in the basement and when the basement will be full, it'll finally end up burnt in a land fill next to a village in Malaysia or something. Don't be my father.
    - breakfastduck 6y ago
      I'm more surprised you can even pay rent in Paris & eat for <1k a month. You have to remember peoples circumstances too - many people have families or live in very expensive areas, they can't just suddenly stop everything to live on a lower amount like an individual can.
      - cassepipe 6y ago
        I think I live in an expensive area. Rent is 500 euros a month (which is cheap, but I get what I pay for). Phone is five euros/month. So is internet (shared). I don't pay transportation because I think it should be free since I am not polluting common air with a car. Else I have a bike. Then I have 400 euros that need to be shared among food (which is swiftly shoplifted if expensive ;), clothing (which I already have plenty so I am fine) and nights out (which at the moment is rather quiet you know why). I cut my own hair or ask a friend. Short period of more intense work paid for all the *ware. Rather fine I must say. As I said my point is not to say that everyone should be like me although I like to show off how not-wealthy I am for the high of moral superiority. My point is that thinking you need more money is often intricated with irrational emotions. It has happened to me various times to have someone I know is doing fine complaining about being "tight". When a person that's poor say "I have no money", it's means the account balance is dangerously close to 0,when a well off person says so, it means "I wish I did not have to cut down expenses so I can maintain my standard of living".
piamancini 6y ago
You have a point! The goal though is not for one FUND to support they entire ecosystem but for many funds supporting it. 1k from one fund and 3k from another for example + recurring subscriptions from individuals, end up adding up. (disclosure, I am OC co-founder)
lallysingh 6y ago
I don't think the $1k/month would fully cover a full time engineer. A few similar contributions would. Or an engineer doing this work as a side project.
xbar 6y ago
I think it is likely an alternative career path for a handful of FOSS unicorns whose work is so instrumental that private corporations desperately need their work to continue. Among us, some "entrepreneurs" will produce 100 little projects and try to get them all funded and then Show HN how they make a living off of dozens of lightly funded projects. Funds for Open Source will globalize some work inasmuch as some developers will get paid some money in places where no development career paths exist now. Look at the World Economic Forum's Global Competitiveness report and you can find at least 20 countries where tech companies do not hire. To your point, the reason people open source for free is that they cannot produce free software and get paid. There is no way for them to be compensated for working in alignment with their own values. Funds for Open Source attacks that problem. I don't know that Funds is a good organization, or that they are fair in their pricing, or whether they are the best equipped private, for-profit company to wedge themselves between free-thinking developers and the corporate entities that consume their work for free, but I think the business model for Funds makes a lot of sense.

ocdtrekkie 6y ago

The problem is that projects by big companies are often encumbered by their business decisions. Companies rarely find privacy profitable, so it's usually the first feature to get rid of, but if they use or need an open source tool that respects privacy, they may pay for it. Funds from tech companies won't alone make open source development sustainable, but it'll help.

prepend 6y ago
All projects are encumbered by business decisions. I think open source improves on this problem because now I can fork and extend because a company open sourced something. This is not perfect, but it’s better than when I can’t. I think a better approach is trying to encourage more of a gift economy with people working on stuff for free and sharing it. It’s funny how I’m willing to accept some hair and do work myself as part of a community, but if I have to pay for it, I lose that community motivation. For example, I’m willing to spend time writing up an issue for an OSS project with a test script, etc. but I won’t do that for a commercial company.

cassepipe 6y ago

I would rather make 1k a month and work on something I like on my terms than to have a stressful/meaningless job around the clock with unpaid working hours all around. There only so much shit you really need. And you need time for your friends/loved one. You'll live poorer but longer. Edit : This is not a fantasy about poverty being more genuine. Poverty makes you die sooner. My point is a life spent running after money and positions is a meaningless life. Edit 2: I may have a bias here since I live with under 1k a month, under my country's minimum wage that is .

breakfastduck 6y ago
Appreciate that's the case for you, but under 1k in either the UK or US or many European countries is completely untenable for independent living.
- cassepipe 6y ago
  I live in Paris so it's quite expensive. Not making a case about my lifestyle which is quite spartan I admit but I am tired of reading people complaining they can't make a living with only 3k a month, like my father, which feels kind of obscene to me. The reason my father is complaining about his financial situation all the time is because is always trying to buy shit to compensate the time he lost doing the job he doesn't like. It all ends up in the basement and when the basement will be full, it'll finally end up burnt in a land fill next to a village in Malaysia or something. Don't be my father.
  - breakfastduck 6y ago
    I'm more surprised you can even pay rent in Paris & eat for <1k a month. You have to remember peoples circumstances too - many people have families or live in very expensive areas, they can't just suddenly stop everything to live on a lower amount like an individual can.
    - cassepipe 6y ago
      I think I live in an expensive area. Rent is 500 euros a month (which is cheap, but I get what I pay for). Phone is five euros/month. So is internet (shared). I don't pay transportation because I think it should be free since I am not polluting common air with a car. Else I have a bike. Then I have 400 euros that need to be shared among food (which is swiftly shoplifted if expensive ;), clothing (which I already have plenty so I am fine) and nights out (which at the moment is rather quiet you know why). I cut my own hair or ask a friend. Short period of more intense work paid for all the *ware. Rather fine I must say. As I said my point is not to say that everyone should be like me although I like to show off how not-wealthy I am for the high of moral superiority. My point is that thinking you need more money is often intricated with irrational emotions. It has happened to me various times to have someone I know is doing fine complaining about being "tight". When a person that's poor say "I have no money", it's means the account balance is dangerously close to 0,when a well off person says so, it means "I wish I did not have to cut down expenses so I can maintain my standard of living".

piamancini 6y ago

You have a point! The goal though is not for one FUND to support they entire ecosystem but for many funds supporting it. 1k from one fund and 3k from another for example + recurring subscriptions from individuals, end up adding up. (disclosure, I am OC co-founder)

lallysingh 6y ago

I don't think the $1k/month would fully cover a full time engineer. A few similar contributions would. Or an engineer doing this work as a side project.

xbar 6y ago

I think it is likely an alternative career path for a handful of FOSS unicorns whose work is so instrumental that private corporations desperately need their work to continue. Among us, some "entrepreneurs" will produce 100 little projects and try to get them all funded and then Show HN how they make a living off of dozens of lightly funded projects. Funds for Open Source will globalize some work inasmuch as some developers will get paid some money in places where no development career paths exist now. Look at the World Economic Forum's Global Competitiveness report and you can find at least 20 countries where tech companies do not hire. To your point, the reason people open source for free is that they cannot produce free software and get paid. There is no way for them to be compensated for working in alignment with their own values. Funds for Open Source attacks that problem. I don't know that Funds is a good organization, or that they are fair in their pricing, or whether they are the best equipped private, for-profit company to wedge themselves between free-thinking developers and the corporate entities that consume their work for free, but I think the business model for Funds makes a lot of sense.