5 ms·

You know GitHub sponsors is a broken experience when you find out GitHub only supports 7 people on their own platform https://github.com/github https://github.c

by armini 3y ago

You know GitHub sponsors is a broken experience when you find out GitHub only supports 7 people on their own platform https://github.com/github https://github.com/github companies really need to fund their dependency tree…

frontalier 3y ago
GH could be doing more but they are also hosting open source, and closed source, repositories for free.
- omnimus 3y ago
  Not exactly for free nowdays since they teach their AIs on the repos.
  - vasdae 3y ago
    Yes, that's still exactly for free.
    - bee_rider 3y ago
      Free doesn’t seem like a great name for situations in which profit is extracted from a user in a sort of nebulous fashion.
      - somsak2 3y ago
        you could say the same thing about ad based businesses. how else is the company supposed to cover its costs if it has a free service?
        bee_rider 3y ago
        They aren’t free, they are ad funded. You pay for the service by viewing the ads. The only organizations that provide free services are, like, donation driven charities. Or hobbyist groups. Maybe somebody could argue for government funded organizations, but I don’t want to get into that whole can of worms.
- phpisthebest 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - Zambyte 3y ago
    > anyone using github free account is the product. Also people who pay for their GitHub account.
  - itsoktocry 3y ago
    >The folly here is you believe MS does this because they want to support open source...In reality they get a TON of value from this "free" service What is the difference? Nobody supports open source for the sake of it, we support it because we get tons of value from the "free" service. It sounds like incentives are properly aligned.
    - cs02rm0 3y ago
      Between a free service for gain and charity?
  - bippihippi1 3y ago
    another common folly is thinking that paying puts you in a special tier. free stuff is solely funded by the value of data, ofc there are exceptions funded by donated money and hard work. The things that are made to make money though, don't suddenly stop using the value of your data because you pay for them.
  - Karunamon 3y ago
    Github has no lock in.
    - phpisthebest 3y ago
      Sure it does, all the tooling around git that many people associate with git. Issues, Wiki, Automation (Github Actions) etc
      - 3y ago
- musha68k 3y ago
  Yes, perfect training grounds for your future “solo-pilot coding agent”. Let’s not kid ourselves, by now we know that data is gold and we hand it to these corporations without ever getting paid for it. One of the main reasons they can “incur losses” on co-pilot is not only future monopolization by market share but also by being provided endless amounts of golden data through usage. So yes, hosting “social git” with some fancy UI and CI and spinning up GPUs (they will constantly need to ramp up on anyways) is peanuts in comparison to the upside. Yes, open source developers as well as co-pilot users should get paid for their labour. Directly and by MSFT.
timenova 3y ago
> github is sponsoring 7 organizations and maintainers and has sponsored 958 in the past Looking at the dates, it seems they sponsor a few people each month? Or some variation of that.
musha68k 3y ago
I recently learned that Kubernetes is running on a lot of free labour. The main draw and ever increasing underpinning for lots of services provided by the behemoth infrastructure entities… GOOG, AMZN, MSFT really?
- appplication 3y ago
  Software labor is so funny. Here we are, with software engineering salaries some of the highest of any profession in the US. While at the same time much of the most critical and commonly used software was written completely for free. It’s an interesting juxtaposition.
  - throw0101c 3y ago
    > While at the same time much of the most critical and commonly used software was written completely for free. Obligatory: * https://xkcd.com/2347/ https://xkcd.com/2347/
    - djbusby 3y ago
      That little block is curl.
- candiddevmike 3y ago
  Almost all of the top Kubernetes contributors work for Kubernetes service providers...?
- multiplied 3y ago
  I wonder if there's a license pegged to some meaningful metric (a hard problem unto itself), that prevents usage if the dev fund/devs are not compensated an X amount in a specified interval. Something like an SOS License. Support Open Source ... All development on this project will cease to exist if dev fund does not meet "DOL Software Dev CPI adjusted Blah Blah Salary" * Number of active/approved devs. Bugfixes will stop if dev fund falls below Y amount or something ... Just some half baked thoughts, many conditions can be added or removed depending on the project structure/goals, but the underlying thought would be that Devs Get Paid is a key requirement in there somewhere. Lots to consider here, but it's weird that no popular licenses have this as a clause in there - almost like it's frowned upon to ask for money?

by armini 3y ago

frontalier 3y ago

GH could be doing more but they are also hosting open source, and closed source, repositories for free.

omnimus 3y ago
Not exactly for free nowdays since they teach their AIs on the repos.
- vasdae 3y ago
  Yes, that's still exactly for free.
  - bee_rider 3y ago
    Free doesn’t seem like a great name for situations in which profit is extracted from a user in a sort of nebulous fashion.
    - somsak2 3y ago
      you could say the same thing about ad based businesses. how else is the company supposed to cover its costs if it has a free service?
      - bee_rider 3y ago
        They aren’t free, they are ad funded. You pay for the service by viewing the ads. The only organizations that provide free services are, like, donation driven charities. Or hobbyist groups. Maybe somebody could argue for government funded organizations, but I don’t want to get into that whole can of worms.
phpisthebest 3y ago
[flagged]
- Zambyte 3y ago
  > anyone using github free account is the product. Also people who pay for their GitHub account.
- itsoktocry 3y ago
  >The folly here is you believe MS does this because they want to support open source...In reality they get a TON of value from this "free" service What is the difference? Nobody supports open source for the sake of it, we support it because we get tons of value from the "free" service. It sounds like incentives are properly aligned.
  - cs02rm0 3y ago
    Between a free service for gain and charity?
- bippihippi1 3y ago
  another common folly is thinking that paying puts you in a special tier. free stuff is solely funded by the value of data, ofc there are exceptions funded by donated money and hard work. The things that are made to make money though, don't suddenly stop using the value of your data because you pay for them.
- Karunamon 3y ago
  Github has no lock in.
  - phpisthebest 3y ago
    Sure it does, all the tooling around git that many people associate with git. Issues, Wiki, Automation (Github Actions) etc
    - 3y ago
musha68k 3y ago
Yes, perfect training grounds for your future “solo-pilot coding agent”. Let’s not kid ourselves, by now we know that data is gold and we hand it to these corporations without ever getting paid for it. One of the main reasons they can “incur losses” on co-pilot is not only future monopolization by market share but also by being provided endless amounts of golden data through usage. So yes, hosting “social git” with some fancy UI and CI and spinning up GPUs (they will constantly need to ramp up on anyways) is peanuts in comparison to the upside. Yes, open source developers as well as co-pilot users should get paid for their labour. Directly and by MSFT.

timenova 3y ago

> github is sponsoring 7 organizations and maintainers and has sponsored 958 in the past Looking at the dates, it seems they sponsor a few people each month? Or some variation of that.

musha68k 3y ago

I recently learned that Kubernetes is running on a lot of free labour. The main draw and ever increasing underpinning for lots of services provided by the behemoth infrastructure entities… GOOG, AMZN, MSFT really?

appplication 3y ago
Software labor is so funny. Here we are, with software engineering salaries some of the highest of any profession in the US. While at the same time much of the most critical and commonly used software was written completely for free. It’s an interesting juxtaposition.
- throw0101c 3y ago
  > While at the same time much of the most critical and commonly used software was written completely for free. Obligatory: * https://xkcd.com/2347/ https://xkcd.com/2347/
  - djbusby 3y ago
    That little block is curl.
candiddevmike 3y ago
Almost all of the top Kubernetes contributors work for Kubernetes service providers...?
multiplied 3y ago
I wonder if there's a license pegged to some meaningful metric (a hard problem unto itself), that prevents usage if the dev fund/devs are not compensated an X amount in a specified interval. Something like an SOS License. Support Open Source ... All development on this project will cease to exist if dev fund does not meet "DOL Software Dev CPI adjusted Blah Blah Salary" * Number of active/approved devs. Bugfixes will stop if dev fund falls below Y amount or something ... Just some half baked thoughts, many conditions can be added or removed depending on the project structure/goals, but the underlying thought would be that Devs Get Paid is a key requirement in there somewhere. Lots to consider here, but it's weird that no popular licenses have this as a clause in there - almost like it's frowned upon to ask for money?