4 ms·
> I hope we don't ever make money a barrier to open source. Then make some other very cumbersome proof. But it's still better to cut off half the world from op
by alkonaut 4y ago
> I hope we don't ever make money a barrier to open source.
Then make some other very cumbersome proof. But it's still better to cut off half the world from open source than pollute the few large software repositories with spam, which would dissuade everyone everywhere from contributing eventually.
There's no problem contributing to a library from anywhere it's just that you collaborate with someone who in turn can pay the reg/anti-spam fee.
- newswasboring 4y agoI don't understand this obsession with solving everything with money. It doesn't event solve this problem, just because someone payed the fee doesn't mean their code is not spam. You can't keep the fee small enough and still dissuade spammers.
- alkonaut 4y agoYou can do reputation, or money, or some "proof of work". Or you can do all of them. But money is by far the easiest one to implement. You could e.g. either require the votes of 3 separate maintainers of packages totaling 100k downloads in order to upload a new package, or you could have a $10 fee. The reason money is natural is because there is a cost associated with manually vetting all packages.
- newswasboring 4y agoEverything is easy if all you care about the KPIs your system performs well in. Making any system with money is easy if you don't care about equality or fairness.