3 ms·

Why is it open source software if the goal is make money off of it? The problem is devs shouldn’t feel like their hobby became a job, they should stop maintaini

Why is it open source software if the goal is make money off of it? The problem is devs shouldn’t feel like their hobby became a job, they should stop maintaining the code if it becomes to much of a job, or commercialize it. Have a fork that is private and monitized with extra features. The street performer example was spot on, the existence of a package and its promotion doesn’t entitle it to compensation. What if the performers suck and detract from the passerbys park experience? Are they entitled to compensation for indirectly listing to music they didn’t want to hear in the first place?

mustache_kimono 4y ago
> Why is it open source software if the goal is make money off of it? The problem is devs shouldn’t feel like their hobby became a job, they should stop maintaining the code if it becomes to much of a job, or commercialize it. Have a fork that is private and monitized with extra features. Why isn't it? Did Linux stop being OSS when Linus first got paid for developing it? Plenty of devs would love to do the same and make a few dollars from their hobby project! > What if the performers suck and detract from the passerbys park experience? Are they entitled to compensation for indirectly listing to music they didn’t want to hear in the first place? I made top level post re: these questions[0], but I'd make a few addendums to the article: 1. a packaging service for FOSS should always be free for non-commercial use, 2. for commercial use, the pricing should not be on a per package basis but priced for the service of packaging the packages and the pricing should be modest, 3. substantial portion of which (>50%) should then go to the FOSS devs based on their install base, 4. this should except the standard installation, which should receive a highly reduced share. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31961092 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31961092

mustache_kimono 4y ago

> Why is it open source software if the goal is make money off of it? The problem is devs shouldn’t feel like their hobby became a job, they should stop maintaining the code if it becomes to much of a job, or commercialize it. Have a fork that is private and monitized with extra features. Why isn't it? Did Linux stop being OSS when Linus first got paid for developing it? Plenty of devs would love to do the same and make a few dollars from their hobby project! > What if the performers suck and detract from the passerbys park experience? Are they entitled to compensation for indirectly listing to music they didn’t want to hear in the first place? I made top level post re: these questions[0], but I'd make a few addendums to the article: 1. a packaging service for FOSS should always be free for non-commercial use, 2. for commercial use, the pricing should not be on a per package basis but priced for the service of packaging the packages and the pricing should be modest, 3. substantial portion of which (>50%) should then go to the FOSS devs based on their install base, 4. this should except the standard installation, which should receive a highly reduced share. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31961092 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31961092