5 ms·

Game dev here: * it's got a license that allows it to be embedded * it's well known amongst game devs * its deals very well with all the mind-numbingly unint

Game dev here: * it's got a license that allows it to be embedded * it's well known amongst game devs * its deals very well with all the mind-numbingly uninteresting network issues game devs don't care about It's mostly used for analytics, fetching news, RSS feeds etc. Seperate proprietry libs are used for the CDN side of game dev. Basically it works and the gamedev industry is incredibly conservative about new/different tech. Alas it's also greedy. I know of games making $1 million a day that pay nothing in to the curl.

xyst 2y ago
$1M/day … Genshin Impact? Or maybe a handful of the microtransaction/IAP filled games.
- dgb23 2y ago
  At this point we should rename "microtransactions" to "macrotransactions". From a quick search: $500 for a character cosmetic: https://www.si.com/esports/league-of-legends/ahri-ban-rate https://www.si.com/esports/league-of-legends/ahri-ban-rate $50'000 for a feature bundle: https://www.ign.com/articles/star-citizen-introducing-a-48000-ship-bundle-but-only-for-players-who-have-already-spent-10000 https://www.ign.com/articles/star-citizen-introducing-a-4800... $100'000 for an auctioned weapon cosmetic: https://www.followchain.org/most-expensive-csgo-knives/ https://www.followchain.org/most-expensive-csgo-knives/
  - xyst 2y ago
    I’m in the wrong business. Just need a product that attracts a couple of whales with addictions for superficial items, especially digital ones.
- mopsi 2y ago
  Grand Theft Auto V uses curl and earns about that much in a year. Fortnite, Roblox and PUBG use curl too; they're massive money-printing machines. https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2023/06/09/games-curl-too/ https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2023/06/09/games-curl-too/
dijit 2y ago
^ this is the true. Sadly, it's really difficult to get companies to pay money they don't have to.
- sph 2y ago
  Then don't choose a super permissive license like BSD/MIT. I was reading The Wealth Of Nations by Adam Smith recently (1776), and one passage stuck to me: that the regular market works because it is driven by the inherent self-interest and egoism of humans, while only beggars expect to earn a living out of the goodwill of the people. I love free software, but it makes no sense as a business model. If you want to make money out of free software while avoiding leeches, use a serious license. AGPL3, MPL2.0 or EUPL. The entire ecosystem of permissive licenses is pushed, hard, by companies themselves, and perpetuated by their naive employees. Hence the creation of the corporate-friendly Open Source Initiative (OSI) that has completely eaten the lunch of the FSF.
  - Sharlin 2y ago
    So, how exactly would Adam Smith explain the open source ecosystem? OSS devs clearly aren't beggars because they create value.
    - schneems 2y ago
      I do a ton of open source but I don’t beg. I negotiate with my employer to find a common goal that advances the business and the community. Companies don’t donate out of (pure) goodwill. Lots of talks about risk mitigation. Even if they don’t donate money, the devs who rely on dependencies can still donate time as they choose (within limits).
  - schneems 2y ago
    > Then don't choose a super permissive license like BSD/MIT. One big problem is that you cannot encode all possible wants and wishes into a legal document. Laurence Lessig, founding member of Creative Commons, wrote in Code 2.0 (1999) about four elements that regulate behavior online: Laws, norms, markets, and technology - *Code/architecture* – the physical or technical constraints on activities (e.g. locks on doors or firewalls on the Internet) - *Market* – economic forces - *Law* – explicit mandates that can be enforced by the government - *Norms* – social conventions that one often feels compelled to follow It also doesn’t help that OSI and FSF operate as though they are each other’s biggest enemies instead of all the other threats out there. I feel like the definitions of “Free” and “Open” are too binary and lack nuance. I wish for something more, an open “score”, for example. Sure the Hipocratic license isn’t permissive but the only limitation it imposes is predicated on committing human atrocities as defined in legal code by the Geneva convention. So maybe it’s “closer” to MIT then say the “business source license” which is actively restricting commercialization. Or to put it another way: If we want software devs to choose licenses that are closer to their actual goals (like CC-BY-NC) then we need to find ways as a community to distinguish these projects as better than pure closed source, proprietary software. Because right now FSF and OSI classify both the same.

xyst 2y ago

$1M/day … Genshin Impact? Or maybe a handful of the microtransaction/IAP filled games.

dgb23 2y ago
At this point we should rename "microtransactions" to "macrotransactions". From a quick search: $500 for a character cosmetic: https://www.si.com/esports/league-of-legends/ahri-ban-rate https://www.si.com/esports/league-of-legends/ahri-ban-rate $50'000 for a feature bundle: https://www.ign.com/articles/star-citizen-introducing-a-48000-ship-bundle-but-only-for-players-who-have-already-spent-10000 https://www.ign.com/articles/star-citizen-introducing-a-4800... $100'000 for an auctioned weapon cosmetic: https://www.followchain.org/most-expensive-csgo-knives/ https://www.followchain.org/most-expensive-csgo-knives/
- xyst 2y ago
  I’m in the wrong business. Just need a product that attracts a couple of whales with addictions for superficial items, especially digital ones.
mopsi 2y ago
Grand Theft Auto V uses curl and earns about that much in a year. Fortnite, Roblox and PUBG use curl too; they're massive money-printing machines. https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2023/06/09/games-curl-too/ https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2023/06/09/games-curl-too/

dijit 2y ago

^ this is the true. Sadly, it's really difficult to get companies to pay money they don't have to.

sph 2y ago
Then don't choose a super permissive license like BSD/MIT. I was reading The Wealth Of Nations by Adam Smith recently (1776), and one passage stuck to me: that the regular market works because it is driven by the inherent self-interest and egoism of humans, while only beggars expect to earn a living out of the goodwill of the people. I love free software, but it makes no sense as a business model. If you want to make money out of free software while avoiding leeches, use a serious license. AGPL3, MPL2.0 or EUPL. The entire ecosystem of permissive licenses is pushed, hard, by companies themselves, and perpetuated by their naive employees. Hence the creation of the corporate-friendly Open Source Initiative (OSI) that has completely eaten the lunch of the FSF.
- Sharlin 2y ago
  So, how exactly would Adam Smith explain the open source ecosystem? OSS devs clearly aren't beggars because they create value.
  - schneems 2y ago
    I do a ton of open source but I don’t beg. I negotiate with my employer to find a common goal that advances the business and the community. Companies don’t donate out of (pure) goodwill. Lots of talks about risk mitigation. Even if they don’t donate money, the devs who rely on dependencies can still donate time as they choose (within limits).
- schneems 2y ago
  > Then don't choose a super permissive license like BSD/MIT. One big problem is that you cannot encode all possible wants and wishes into a legal document. Laurence Lessig, founding member of Creative Commons, wrote in Code 2.0 (1999) about four elements that regulate behavior online: Laws, norms, markets, and technology - *Code/architecture* – the physical or technical constraints on activities (e.g. locks on doors or firewalls on the Internet) - *Market* – economic forces - *Law* – explicit mandates that can be enforced by the government - *Norms* – social conventions that one often feels compelled to follow It also doesn’t help that OSI and FSF operate as though they are each other’s biggest enemies instead of all the other threats out there. I feel like the definitions of “Free” and “Open” are too binary and lack nuance. I wish for something more, an open “score”, for example. Sure the Hipocratic license isn’t permissive but the only limitation it imposes is predicated on committing human atrocities as defined in legal code by the Geneva convention. So maybe it’s “closer” to MIT then say the “business source license” which is actively restricting commercialization. Or to put it another way: If we want software devs to choose licenses that are closer to their actual goals (like CC-BY-NC) then we need to find ways as a community to distinguish these projects as better than pure closed source, proprietary software. Because right now FSF and OSI classify both the same.