6 ms·

I mourn for my hobby, but it's worth it to be sidelined in favor of software produced by responsible parties. In other words, this will create even more barrie

I mourn for my hobby, but it's worth it to be sidelined in favor of software produced by responsible parties. In other words, this will create even more barriers to entry that will further entrench giant companies who have the necessary armies of lawyers and security engineers.

lijok 3y ago
It will not. In fact, it might even create jobs and a better ecosystem for developers to work in. Good OSS will become commercial software, which will be upheld to a significantly higher standard.
- cobertos 3y ago
  No, jobs created will be with the entrenched companies, who will grow their monopoly over the software labor market and make the software ecosystem _worse_. Tackling legislation and compliance requires scale or money (to outsource the compliance work). This WILL add barriers to entry for new companies.
  - lijok 3y ago
    Do you think that perhaps an increased need for compliance officers would create more compliance jobs, thereby creating jobs and reducing the scale and money required to tackle legislation and compliance?
    - cobertos 3y ago
      Existing business will have to pay for those compliance officers, salaried or through outsourced work. It WILL require more scale. There is no reduction here. In absolute terms, less time will be spent writing software and more time will be spent on compliance (which maybe a good thing for traditional, corporate software!). But, it's not something your average open source developer is falling all over themselves to have anything to do with.
    - PixyMisa 3y ago
      Well, it never has in the entire history of humanity, but sure, whatever.
      - lijok 3y ago
        So compliance officers don't exist, or am I misunderstanding what you're trying to say?
        AnthonyMouse 3y ago
        Two-person startups don't have a full-time compliance officer, so who do these economies of scale benefit?
        lijok 3y ago
        That's interesting. Every startup I've ever worked at, the chief compliance officer & mlro was one of the first 2-3 employees to get hired (as far as I can recall).
        cinntaile 3y ago
        Wouldn't it be better if they could instead hire someone that adds actual value as one of their early employees rather than someone they need to fulfill some bureaucratic requirement?
        lijok 3y ago
        Better for whom?
        cinntaile 3y ago
        Both for society and the company. You want more small companies to succeed in your society, they are the engine of growth after all. One way to help out is by reducing their bureaucratic burden. This is all well researched and well documented.
- cinntaile 3y ago
  Regulatory capture is a well-studied phenomenon.
carapace 3y ago
Well, I think that soon most software will be written by machine, in something like Idris or Lean, and merely guided by humans via a linguistic interface. With any luck, within a decade or two, the idea of buggy insecure software will be as anachronistic as baking one's own bread.

lijok 3y ago

It will not. In fact, it might even create jobs and a better ecosystem for developers to work in. Good OSS will become commercial software, which will be upheld to a significantly higher standard.

cobertos 3y ago
No, jobs created will be with the entrenched companies, who will grow their monopoly over the software labor market and make the software ecosystem _worse_. Tackling legislation and compliance requires scale or money (to outsource the compliance work). This WILL add barriers to entry for new companies.
- lijok 3y ago
  Do you think that perhaps an increased need for compliance officers would create more compliance jobs, thereby creating jobs and reducing the scale and money required to tackle legislation and compliance?
  - cobertos 3y ago
    Existing business will have to pay for those compliance officers, salaried or through outsourced work. It WILL require more scale. There is no reduction here. In absolute terms, less time will be spent writing software and more time will be spent on compliance (which maybe a good thing for traditional, corporate software!). But, it's not something your average open source developer is falling all over themselves to have anything to do with.
  - PixyMisa 3y ago
    Well, it never has in the entire history of humanity, but sure, whatever.
    - lijok 3y ago
      So compliance officers don't exist, or am I misunderstanding what you're trying to say?
      - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
        Two-person startups don't have a full-time compliance officer, so who do these economies of scale benefit?
        lijok 3y ago
        That's interesting. Every startup I've ever worked at, the chief compliance officer & mlro was one of the first 2-3 employees to get hired (as far as I can recall).
        cinntaile 3y ago
        Wouldn't it be better if they could instead hire someone that adds actual value as one of their early employees rather than someone they need to fulfill some bureaucratic requirement?
        lijok 3y ago
        Better for whom?
        cinntaile 3y ago
        Both for society and the company. You want more small companies to succeed in your society, they are the engine of growth after all. One way to help out is by reducing their bureaucratic burden. This is all well researched and well documented.
cinntaile 3y ago
Regulatory capture is a well-studied phenomenon.

carapace 3y ago

Well, I think that soon most software will be written by machine, in something like Idris or Lean, and merely guided by humans via a linguistic interface. With any luck, within a decade or two, the idea of buggy insecure software will be as anachronistic as baking one's own bread.