4 ms·

Is working full-time on open source software (if you’re good) for free or for a meagre stipend the most effective altruism there is? When you consider multiplie

by Tycho 5y ago

Is working full-time on open source software (if you’re good) for free or for a meagre stipend the most effective altruism there is? When you consider multiplier effects.

willm 5y ago
I'm sure its not. But this is one of the few (possibly only) things I'm actually good at. And it's not entirely altruistic, I think this work will benefit me financially in the future.
- ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago
  Good luck! I used to say "My dream is to work for free." At the time, I earned my keep as a manager, and had to do all my coding as extracurricular open-source projects (I've been writing open source for over 20 years). I am now living the dream. A few years ago, I was basically forced into early retirement, and it's the best thing that ever happened to me. I manage to keep busy: https://stackoverflow.com/story/chrismarshall https://stackoverflow.com/story/chrismarshall
sidlls 5y ago
Not really, no: it isn't even a very high quality act, and in fact can be quite negative: 1. The multiplier is net negative for software engineers: it advances the commoditization of our knowledge skills; 2. It does so while providing essentially free labor for large organizations with agendas that are rarely positive for society; 3. Most (>99.99%) software development is not similar to, say, mathematical, engineering or scientific inquiry: there's no similar value produced for society by working on it (open source or otherwise), and people who work on open source now thinking they're following the traditions of the hackers of 30-40 years ago are quite mistaken (see above two items) most of the time Some open source software projects are altruistic. The vast overwhelming majority are not.
- hyproxia 5y ago
  >The multiplier is net negative for software engineers Good. >It does so while providing essentially free labor for large organizations with agendas that are rarely positive for society And? The only downside that I can see is that corporations might take your work without providing their modifications back. Copyleft licenses mitigate this issue.
- coliveira 5y ago
  This. I wonder why more people don't understand the negative effects of open source (at least in the way it is practiced). It is essentially free labor for Apple, Amazon, and pretty much any big company that already understood how to use open source to get the benefits for their paid products.
  - dgb23 5y ago
    Doesn't that kind of depend on the license?
  - sidlls 5y ago
    Because it's the "nerdy" software engineers' version of social media: a way to exercise some ego/narcissism.
    - trutannus 5y ago
      > a way to exercise some ego/narcissism Alright, then how do you explain the folks who have completely anonymous open source contributor identities? Or folks who commit documentation improvements? I think flattening the entire open source world down to ego and narcissism is reductive to the point of being wrong.
      - sidlls 5y ago
        You've set up a fine strawman to burn down: I never even implied what you suggest.
        trutannus 5y ago
        I fail to see an alternative way to interpret what you wrote. By all means, feel free to elaborate.
  - Tycho 5y ago
    If all the big companies use open source software, that creates a nice level playing field for the whole economy. Anyone with capital can start a rival enterprise. Competition breeds innovation and drives down prices. The general public benefits greatly.
- goodpoint 5y ago
  Companies LOVE unpaid labor and they push incessantly for "company-friendly" weak licenses. We need to take back FLOSS from SaaS providers and similar megacorps: please use AGPL.
- matkoniecz 5y ago
  > Most (>99.99%) software development is not similar to, say, mathematical, engineering or scientific inquiry: there's no similar value produced for society by working on it (open source or otherwise) Claiming that less than 0.01% of open source projects provides any value overall seems to be quite pessimistic and not matching reality. Really, just 1 project in 10 000?

by Tycho 5y ago

Is working full-time on open source software (if you’re good) for free or for a meagre stipend the most effective altruism there is? When you consider multiplier effects.

willm 5y ago

I'm sure its not. But this is one of the few (possibly only) things I'm actually good at. And it's not entirely altruistic, I think this work will benefit me financially in the future.

ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago
Good luck! I used to say "My dream is to work for free." At the time, I earned my keep as a manager, and had to do all my coding as extracurricular open-source projects (I've been writing open source for over 20 years). I am now living the dream. A few years ago, I was basically forced into early retirement, and it's the best thing that ever happened to me. I manage to keep busy: https://stackoverflow.com/story/chrismarshall https://stackoverflow.com/story/chrismarshall

sidlls 5y ago

Not really, no: it isn't even a very high quality act, and in fact can be quite negative: 1. The multiplier is net negative for software engineers: it advances the commoditization of our knowledge skills; 2. It does so while providing essentially free labor for large organizations with agendas that are rarely positive for society; 3. Most (>99.99%) software development is not similar to, say, mathematical, engineering or scientific inquiry: there's no similar value produced for society by working on it (open source or otherwise), and people who work on open source now thinking they're following the traditions of the hackers of 30-40 years ago are quite mistaken (see above two items) most of the time Some open source software projects are altruistic. The vast overwhelming majority are not.

hyproxia 5y ago
>The multiplier is net negative for software engineers Good. >It does so while providing essentially free labor for large organizations with agendas that are rarely positive for society And? The only downside that I can see is that corporations might take your work without providing their modifications back. Copyleft licenses mitigate this issue.
coliveira 5y ago
This. I wonder why more people don't understand the negative effects of open source (at least in the way it is practiced). It is essentially free labor for Apple, Amazon, and pretty much any big company that already understood how to use open source to get the benefits for their paid products.
- dgb23 5y ago
  Doesn't that kind of depend on the license?
- sidlls 5y ago
  Because it's the "nerdy" software engineers' version of social media: a way to exercise some ego/narcissism.
  - trutannus 5y ago
    > a way to exercise some ego/narcissism Alright, then how do you explain the folks who have completely anonymous open source contributor identities? Or folks who commit documentation improvements? I think flattening the entire open source world down to ego and narcissism is reductive to the point of being wrong.
    - sidlls 5y ago
      You've set up a fine strawman to burn down: I never even implied what you suggest.
      - trutannus 5y ago
        I fail to see an alternative way to interpret what you wrote. By all means, feel free to elaborate.
- Tycho 5y ago
  If all the big companies use open source software, that creates a nice level playing field for the whole economy. Anyone with capital can start a rival enterprise. Competition breeds innovation and drives down prices. The general public benefits greatly.
goodpoint 5y ago
Companies LOVE unpaid labor and they push incessantly for "company-friendly" weak licenses. We need to take back FLOSS from SaaS providers and similar megacorps: please use AGPL.
matkoniecz 5y ago
> Most (>99.99%) software development is not similar to, say, mathematical, engineering or scientific inquiry: there's no similar value produced for society by working on it (open source or otherwise) Claiming that less than 0.01% of open source projects provides any value overall seems to be quite pessimistic and not matching reality. Really, just 1 project in 10 000?