3 ms·

> Expecting a valuable service with absolutely no consideration in return absolutely is a case of entitlement Like open source software? What you’re talking a

> Expecting a valuable service with absolutely no consideration in return absolutely is a case of entitlement Like open source software? What you’re talking about is not entitlement, it is directed transactionality; “if I am using a service by x, I need to be the one personally compensating x”. X could as well receive some form of compensation from elsewhere. Open source developers can be receiving satisfaction, recognition, even financial compensation without the end user. In fact that’s how charity, in its original sense of a virtue, works. There is no inherent entitlement in assuming non-reciprocal charity. That’s a behavior baked in to humanity. I’d say expecting transactionality everywhere is the truncated, cynical view of human activity.

Kalium 5y ago
> Like open source software? Given how poorly people often treat maintainers, I think "entitlement" is precisely the correct word. Your point about charity is well-made. Though it may perhaps strain credulity to expect email services on a truly massive scale to be offered as non-reciprocal charity.
- p_j_w 5y ago
  >Though it may perhaps strain credulity to expect email services on a truly massive scale to be offered as non-reciprocal charity. Or anything that requires any sort of non-trivial capital to do. Video hosting/streaming (eg. YouTube), social media, news reporting, etc. I'm guessing the person you're replying to doesn't do their full time job for free and just accepts donations from their employers, either.
  - acituan 5y ago
    > I'm guessing the person you're replying to doesn't do their full time job for free and just accepts donations from their employers, either. Eh, this is a false dichotomy of one can either be charitable or transactional in the entirety of the interactions in their lives. In other words, your guess happens to be correct (gainful employment is not a mathematical rarity after all) but still provides no counterargument. OPs claim was expecting anything with value without transacting something back was entitlement. My counterargument was that there exists charity and non-transactionality in many contexts. The condition of anything requiring non-trivial capital is also wrong. We often pool tax money to render capital and services for things we don’t have direct, personal use of. And I am not saying this is necessarily charity, after all it is an obligation, but most folks don’t go after the particular line items of how their money is spent.

Kalium 5y ago

> Like open source software? Given how poorly people often treat maintainers, I think "entitlement" is precisely the correct word. Your point about charity is well-made. Though it may perhaps strain credulity to expect email services on a truly massive scale to be offered as non-reciprocal charity.

p_j_w 5y ago
>Though it may perhaps strain credulity to expect email services on a truly massive scale to be offered as non-reciprocal charity. Or anything that requires any sort of non-trivial capital to do. Video hosting/streaming (eg. YouTube), social media, news reporting, etc. I'm guessing the person you're replying to doesn't do their full time job for free and just accepts donations from their employers, either.
- acituan 5y ago
  > I'm guessing the person you're replying to doesn't do their full time job for free and just accepts donations from their employers, either. Eh, this is a false dichotomy of one can either be charitable or transactional in the entirety of the interactions in their lives. In other words, your guess happens to be correct (gainful employment is not a mathematical rarity after all) but still provides no counterargument. OPs claim was expecting anything with value without transacting something back was entitlement. My counterargument was that there exists charity and non-transactionality in many contexts. The condition of anything requiring non-trivial capital is also wrong. We often pool tax money to render capital and services for things we don’t have direct, personal use of. And I am not saying this is necessarily charity, after all it is an obligation, but most folks don’t go after the particular line items of how their money is spent.