3 ms·

They're not mutually exclusive. FOSS software has vastly different incentives than commercial software, yet suffers from many of the same problems: bugginess,

They're not mutually exclusive. FOSS software has vastly different incentives than commercial software, yet suffers from many of the same problems: bugginess, poor performance, lack of documentation, feature misprioritization, bad UI. That alone indicates that the problem is not merely "misaligned incentives". Actually, you can reduce most problems down to "misaligned incentives" if you're overly reductive enough. That doesn't mean that it's a useful way to think about the world.

jrockway 3y ago
I think Free Software suffers from the misaligned incentives. Take documentation for example. Why would I write it? I already know how the system works. I designed it! If I forget in a few years, a quick glance at the code will refresh my memory. One would argue that you should write documentation so that people will use your thing. That's true! But there is almost no incentive to have users; you pay a cost, but they pay nothing in return. (Someone will send a bugfix now and again, of course, but it's very very rare.) Some other incentives are balanced, though. Persistent low performance or bugginess affects the author and end users equally; the more the author uses their own software, the more this will hurt. Sometimes the low performance is a design trade off; Python isn't Rust, and the users seem to be okay with that. It was done on purpose. Sometimes low performance is a factor of the author's needs; you're trying to run the thing on 1 billion machines, they only have 1; something has got to give. But that's not misaligned incentives so much as it is lack of suitability for a particular purpose. A screwdriver is terrible for hammering in nails. That's not the screwdriver's fault.
- indymike 3y ago
  > I think Free Software suffers from the misaligned incentives. It's really hard to tell what the motivation of any given free software author is. That makes it really hard to even know what incentives matter to any give author, team or community. It's just really diverse. > That's true! But there is almost no incentive to have users; you pay a cost, but they pay nothing in return. It's fascinating to see free software with huge user bases getting on with a tiny number of contributors. It seems like good code + near zero support cost + near zero support expectation seems to work.
  - TheOtherHobbes 3y ago
    Many, likely most, FS projects seem to fall under "likes tinkering." So it's often a different spin on "add shiny tech", except without any PM at all.

jrockway 3y ago

I think Free Software suffers from the misaligned incentives. Take documentation for example. Why would I write it? I already know how the system works. I designed it! If I forget in a few years, a quick glance at the code will refresh my memory. One would argue that you should write documentation so that people will use your thing. That's true! But there is almost no incentive to have users; you pay a cost, but they pay nothing in return. (Someone will send a bugfix now and again, of course, but it's very very rare.) Some other incentives are balanced, though. Persistent low performance or bugginess affects the author and end users equally; the more the author uses their own software, the more this will hurt. Sometimes the low performance is a design trade off; Python isn't Rust, and the users seem to be okay with that. It was done on purpose. Sometimes low performance is a factor of the author's needs; you're trying to run the thing on 1 billion machines, they only have 1; something has got to give. But that's not misaligned incentives so much as it is lack of suitability for a particular purpose. A screwdriver is terrible for hammering in nails. That's not the screwdriver's fault.

indymike 3y ago
> I think Free Software suffers from the misaligned incentives. It's really hard to tell what the motivation of any given free software author is. That makes it really hard to even know what incentives matter to any give author, team or community. It's just really diverse. > That's true! But there is almost no incentive to have users; you pay a cost, but they pay nothing in return. It's fascinating to see free software with huge user bases getting on with a tiny number of contributors. It seems like good code + near zero support cost + near zero support expectation seems to work.
- TheOtherHobbes 3y ago
  Many, likely most, FS projects seem to fall under "likes tinkering." So it's often a different spin on "add shiny tech", except without any PM at all.