8 ms·

I have to admit that this quip pisses me off because open source developers have been so very generous to me. That their work is done in public and in front of

I have to admit that this quip pisses me off because open source developers have been so very generous to me. That their work is done in public and in front of the world should not give us extra ammunition to put their efforts down. There are countless closed source packages that are arcane and hard to deal with - we just don't see them so there not able to be criticized.

throwaway823882 6y ago
I write open source software. If it was difficult for people to use, I would not get pissed off that people pointed this out. Like, if I were a woodworker, and made free chairs... you would be right in complaining if it was full of splinters, if it required you to buy hardware and drills, if it was uneven and clunky. It's a shit chair. There's no dishonor in acknowledging what it is. I would not expect a pat on the back just because I made it free.
- qchris 6y ago
  I'm some ways, I get your analogy, but I think you're making an assumption that it doesn't support. Open source software is rarely "here's a free chair, that also doesn't have splinters." It's far more often "Here are some free blanks for a chair I made. It's not totally finished, so you'll probably need to do some work on it yourself. But the joints are easy to dis/re-assemble, so feel free to examine it all and modify or replace them to meet your needs. Also, don't sue me." In that context, it's much more understandable, not because anyone's wrong per se, but because fundamentally the expectations are mismatched.
  - visiblink 6y ago
    I would take issue with "far more often." I guess that's true if you're searching out software on Github or the equivalent. If you're installing packages from your distribution's repository, there are tens of thousands of finished free software products (inasmuch as any software, open or proprietary, is ever finished).
    - qchris 6y ago
      But tens of thousands of finished-ish products is a drop in the bucket compared to the total scale of FOSS software through Github/Gitlab. For GPL alone, a quick license search on Github reveals almost 2M individual repositories with that license. I'd wager that it's unlikely a majority of those would meet an include-in-a-distro's-package-manager level of polish.
      - visiblink 6y ago
        I agree with your math and your assessment of what's available at Github and the like. Perhaps part of the problem is that people (including many developers) treat git repositories as app stores. It seems unfair to complain that you're getting rough products when you're snatching them off the factory floor -- or out of the design room.
  - detaro 6y ago
    But the tweet is just pointing out that mismatch, not really blaming anyone for it?
ceres 6y ago
Maybe it's just me but I've noticed that free software (especially of the GPL kind) has been getting lots of hate lately. Is it because of the recent rms debacle? I never noticed it before.
- cjfd 6y ago
  I am not sure it is because of rms. It does start to feel like an orchestrated campaign.....
- formerly_proven 6y ago
  Meh, probably comes from corpos who are irritated they can’t use the software the way they’d like (in violation of the GPL that is).
  - boogies 6y ago
    Not mutually exclusive, “corpos” are a major force behind the anti-rms drama.
- benjohnson 6y ago
  I think you made a great observation. If you did want to control the future of information flowing from person to person, I can think of no higher threat than free software. Givin that premise, I would expect to see a lot more opposition to free software if large governent and large business intrest decide to consolidate their power and think that open communication is a hindrance.
- ericwood 6y ago
  GPL, especially GPLv3, have always been contentious. There was also very recently a high-profile issue involving it and a ruby gem used by Rails that caused a lot of headaches for a lot of people, so it's top of mind for many.
  - boogies 6y ago
    > issue involving it and a ruby gem used by Rails I hadn’t heard of this, I assume you mean https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26566925 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26566925?
chociej 6y ago
Well, I don't think it's reflective of the vast majority of FOSS, at least measured by # of installs. Every time someone does a system-wide update with their package manager, an experience which is probably often best described as mundane, it's a testament to just how successful FOSS has been. Certainly there is software in relatively deep niches that is quite arcane, but I also don't think that's exclusive to FOSS.
anthony_romeo 6y ago
Like most memes and quips, it's a funny and apt observation... that generalizes too far and should have been a lengthier article with examples and suggestions of how to better manage FOSS projects to make projects more appealing, instead of just a fit of anger. And a street piano you could own... arguably better than merely renting one.
benjaminjosephw 6y ago
Isn't the sentiment really about how end-user unfriendly a lot of open source is. It is generously shared but sometimes only within the community that already understands the conventions and has the technical/historic knowledge to make sense of it. Generosity shouldn't be sneered on, I agree, but we also have to recognize that the audience for our code is significantly broader than it was in the days of the Free Software movement. It all stated as a movement to empower end-users but it seems that end-users sometimes don't always feel empowered by it.
- ponow 6y ago
  Free software is less about providing what users want ("free beer") than in not getting in their way by artificially restricting them in their dealing with the software ("freedom"). It's the difference between positive rights (to someone's labor, which is also known as servitude), and negative rights (freedom to use the software as you wish). End users who don't feel empowered by freedom aren't entitled to free labor. They should realize that at least they have the option to control the software they use by hiring someone to fix/alter it or learning enough to do it themselves, which is impossible for proprietary software.
visiblink 6y ago
I would add to this that it seems like I can find the software I need in the Debian repositories 99% of the time. If I can't, it's usually because I want to do something niche. In those cases, it's on me to figure out what to do next.
commandlinefan 6y ago
open source developers who believe in open source have been, and we collectively owe them a lot. However, there's a lot of pretend open source out there that's just trend-chasing - either corporations that are trying to exploit the community by "open sourcing" but not documenting or supporting their products, or by developers looking to make a reputation for themselves but who don't really have anything valuable to provide. Linux? Yes. Spring? Not so much.
MaxBarraclough 6y ago
My first thought was a little different: this is just a rather empty and snarky expression of Sturgeon's Law, as applied to Free and Open Source software. Yes, Free and Open Source software can sometimes be difficult to build and set up. This differs from closed-source software only in that closed-source software denies you the ability to build the software yourself. There are still plenty of ways for closed-source software to be difficult to set up. I don't think anyone is claiming that Firefox, for instance, is difficult to set up.
- StavrosK 6y ago
  Yes, Free and Open Source software can sometimes be difficult to build and set up. And even that's better than the software not existing at all. The tweet misses the point. The choice is not between "hacky, janky free software" and "well-made, professional free software". It's between "hacky, janky free software" and "paid software". Don't like FOSS? Pay.
  - number6 6y ago
    Did you ever experience hacky, janky paid software? No Problem - you can rent a consultant to help you along the way! Need a feature? Also no problem - here is that other consultant! Want to be a consultant for our software yourself? Here is our licensed course!
    - StavrosK 6y ago
      There's no money problem that can't be made worse with more money!
    - MaxBarraclough 6y ago
      > Need a feature? Also no problem - here is that other consultant! That doesn't sound right. If you need a feature to be added to a typical proprietary software product, and you aren't a billion dollar company, you're pretty much out of luck. With Free and Open Source software, you have a good chance at being able to pay to have the feature developed, perhaps even in-house.
detaro 6y ago
Eh, closed software is often criticized for being difficult too. To me in this general form it is a valid observation, not an attack. Especially since quite a bit of published open code chooses that perspective intentionally: Feel free to use it however you see fit, but it was written because the author wanted it to do a specific thing for them and it's on you to make it useful for you. Which is still massively better than if they hadn't published it, but not for every audience, and that's totally fine. It's just something to be aware of. And understandably the messaging around this is mixed, because different authors and communities have different views on this.
DoreenMichele 6y ago
To be fair, it's a hot take on twitter by someone with 1222 followers (which is shorthand for "I've never heard of them before and they don't appear to be famous" -- and they probably had fewer followers than that prior to this hitting the front page of HN because people chose to upvote this submission to HN of this tweet).
phendrenad2 6y ago
Maybe a better analogy would be: There's a free piano out front of my apartment, and I want a new piano, and people keep telling me the free piano "works perfectly" (and possibly even mocking me for choosing not to take it) but I know I'll end up paying with my time, so I'll just buy a new piano instead.

throwaway823882 6y ago

I write open source software. If it was difficult for people to use, I would not get pissed off that people pointed this out. Like, if I were a woodworker, and made free chairs... you would be right in complaining if it was full of splinters, if it required you to buy hardware and drills, if it was uneven and clunky. It's a shit chair. There's no dishonor in acknowledging what it is. I would not expect a pat on the back just because I made it free.

qchris 6y ago
I'm some ways, I get your analogy, but I think you're making an assumption that it doesn't support. Open source software is rarely "here's a free chair, that also doesn't have splinters." It's far more often "Here are some free blanks for a chair I made. It's not totally finished, so you'll probably need to do some work on it yourself. But the joints are easy to dis/re-assemble, so feel free to examine it all and modify or replace them to meet your needs. Also, don't sue me." In that context, it's much more understandable, not because anyone's wrong per se, but because fundamentally the expectations are mismatched.
- visiblink 6y ago
  I would take issue with "far more often." I guess that's true if you're searching out software on Github or the equivalent. If you're installing packages from your distribution's repository, there are tens of thousands of finished free software products (inasmuch as any software, open or proprietary, is ever finished).
  - qchris 6y ago
    But tens of thousands of finished-ish products is a drop in the bucket compared to the total scale of FOSS software through Github/Gitlab. For GPL alone, a quick license search on Github reveals almost 2M individual repositories with that license. I'd wager that it's unlikely a majority of those would meet an include-in-a-distro's-package-manager level of polish.
    - visiblink 6y ago
      I agree with your math and your assessment of what's available at Github and the like. Perhaps part of the problem is that people (including many developers) treat git repositories as app stores. It seems unfair to complain that you're getting rough products when you're snatching them off the factory floor -- or out of the design room.
- detaro 6y ago
  But the tweet is just pointing out that mismatch, not really blaming anyone for it?

ceres 6y ago

Maybe it's just me but I've noticed that free software (especially of the GPL kind) has been getting lots of hate lately. Is it because of the recent rms debacle? I never noticed it before.

cjfd 6y ago
I am not sure it is because of rms. It does start to feel like an orchestrated campaign.....
formerly_proven 6y ago
Meh, probably comes from corpos who are irritated they can’t use the software the way they’d like (in violation of the GPL that is).
- boogies 6y ago
  Not mutually exclusive, “corpos” are a major force behind the anti-rms drama.
benjohnson 6y ago
I think you made a great observation. If you did want to control the future of information flowing from person to person, I can think of no higher threat than free software. Givin that premise, I would expect to see a lot more opposition to free software if large governent and large business intrest decide to consolidate their power and think that open communication is a hindrance.
ericwood 6y ago
GPL, especially GPLv3, have always been contentious. There was also very recently a high-profile issue involving it and a ruby gem used by Rails that caused a lot of headaches for a lot of people, so it's top of mind for many.
- boogies 6y ago
  > issue involving it and a ruby gem used by Rails I hadn’t heard of this, I assume you mean https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26566925 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26566925?

chociej 6y ago

Well, I don't think it's reflective of the vast majority of FOSS, at least measured by # of installs. Every time someone does a system-wide update with their package manager, an experience which is probably often best described as mundane, it's a testament to just how successful FOSS has been. Certainly there is software in relatively deep niches that is quite arcane, but I also don't think that's exclusive to FOSS.

anthony_romeo 6y ago

Like most memes and quips, it's a funny and apt observation... that generalizes too far and should have been a lengthier article with examples and suggestions of how to better manage FOSS projects to make projects more appealing, instead of just a fit of anger. And a street piano you could own... arguably better than merely renting one.

benjaminjosephw 6y ago

Isn't the sentiment really about how end-user unfriendly a lot of open source is. It is generously shared but sometimes only within the community that already understands the conventions and has the technical/historic knowledge to make sense of it. Generosity shouldn't be sneered on, I agree, but we also have to recognize that the audience for our code is significantly broader than it was in the days of the Free Software movement. It all stated as a movement to empower end-users but it seems that end-users sometimes don't always feel empowered by it.

ponow 6y ago
Free software is less about providing what users want ("free beer") than in not getting in their way by artificially restricting them in their dealing with the software ("freedom"). It's the difference between positive rights (to someone's labor, which is also known as servitude), and negative rights (freedom to use the software as you wish). End users who don't feel empowered by freedom aren't entitled to free labor. They should realize that at least they have the option to control the software they use by hiring someone to fix/alter it or learning enough to do it themselves, which is impossible for proprietary software.

visiblink 6y ago

I would add to this that it seems like I can find the software I need in the Debian repositories 99% of the time. If I can't, it's usually because I want to do something niche. In those cases, it's on me to figure out what to do next.

commandlinefan 6y ago

open source developers who believe in open source have been, and we collectively owe them a lot. However, there's a lot of pretend open source out there that's just trend-chasing - either corporations that are trying to exploit the community by "open sourcing" but not documenting or supporting their products, or by developers looking to make a reputation for themselves but who don't really have anything valuable to provide. Linux? Yes. Spring? Not so much.

MaxBarraclough 6y ago

My first thought was a little different: this is just a rather empty and snarky expression of Sturgeon's Law, as applied to Free and Open Source software. Yes, Free and Open Source software can sometimes be difficult to build and set up. This differs from closed-source software only in that closed-source software denies you the ability to build the software yourself. There are still plenty of ways for closed-source software to be difficult to set up. I don't think anyone is claiming that Firefox, for instance, is difficult to set up.

StavrosK 6y ago
Yes, Free and Open Source software can sometimes be difficult to build and set up. And even that's better than the software not existing at all. The tweet misses the point. The choice is not between "hacky, janky free software" and "well-made, professional free software". It's between "hacky, janky free software" and "paid software". Don't like FOSS? Pay.
- number6 6y ago
  Did you ever experience hacky, janky paid software? No Problem - you can rent a consultant to help you along the way! Need a feature? Also no problem - here is that other consultant! Want to be a consultant for our software yourself? Here is our licensed course!
  - StavrosK 6y ago
    There's no money problem that can't be made worse with more money!
  - MaxBarraclough 6y ago
    > Need a feature? Also no problem - here is that other consultant! That doesn't sound right. If you need a feature to be added to a typical proprietary software product, and you aren't a billion dollar company, you're pretty much out of luck. With Free and Open Source software, you have a good chance at being able to pay to have the feature developed, perhaps even in-house.

detaro 6y ago

Eh, closed software is often criticized for being difficult too. To me in this general form it is a valid observation, not an attack. Especially since quite a bit of published open code chooses that perspective intentionally: Feel free to use it however you see fit, but it was written because the author wanted it to do a specific thing for them and it's on you to make it useful for you. Which is still massively better than if they hadn't published it, but not for every audience, and that's totally fine. It's just something to be aware of. And understandably the messaging around this is mixed, because different authors and communities have different views on this.

DoreenMichele 6y ago

To be fair, it's a hot take on twitter by someone with 1222 followers (which is shorthand for "I've never heard of them before and they don't appear to be famous" -- and they probably had fewer followers than that prior to this hitting the front page of HN because people chose to upvote this submission to HN of this tweet).

phendrenad2 6y ago

Maybe a better analogy would be: There's a free piano out front of my apartment, and I want a new piano, and people keep telling me the free piano "works perfectly" (and possibly even mocking me for choosing not to take it) but I know I'll end up paying with my time, so I'll just buy a new piano instead.