3 ms·

The problem is that you're trying to change people Sure. But people have changed tremendously over time, right? Often, it's by focused effort (social enginee

The problem is that you're trying to change people Sure. But people have changed tremendously over time, right? Often, it's by focused effort (social engineering, more or less). Until around 150 years ago, slavery was legal in the US. A good chunk of the population saw absolutely nothing wrong with that. 50 years ago, significant racial discrimination was commonplace in many parts of the country, and now it's dramatically improved. I'm not saying a person should live forever off one bit of work. I'm saying that software has a very unique financial model. Also, I can't help feeling that this future of open-source, funded hacking ultimately leads toward a career which is a bit like a non-stop NPR pledge drive. :-)

Natsu 15y ago
Well, take a look at how web comic Howard Taylor does business. I'll let you decide if it's a "nonstop NPR pledge drive", but the fact is that he has a copyrightable work and he's still doing good business even though he gives it away for free. Sure, people change, but they also resist manipulation. And if you look at the copyright middlemen: the RIAA, MPAA & company, you see little but. They hose the artists via exploitative contracts, Hollywood accounting and crazy royalty calculations while talking to no end about helping the artists. Every blockbuster film is a huge money-sink (on paper... the "losses" get paid to their own subsidiaries). Unless you're a rare megastar, the middlemen will screw you in those industries. You're better off doing business for yourself, and there are good ways to do that which don't involve suing grandmothers in federal court for having insecure wifi.