3 ms·

Isn't it obvious? The reward that a personal project can generate for you is limited. It's not remotely close to what a successful project would give you - mone

Isn't it obvious? The reward that a personal project can generate for you is limited. It's not remotely close to what a successful project would give you - money, fulfillment, social capital, feeling good about yourself, etc.

hypfer 8mo ago
Yes but you see, maybe all of that was wrong in the first place? This is just a correction of something that managed to remain in an invalid state for an impressively long time.
- ipaddr 8mo ago
  It was wrong to write software you hoped others would use? The entire open source ecosystem works on this idea otherwise there would be no point in sharing and we can move to closed software.
  - amelius 8mo ago
    Yeah but we've told ourselves that writing software was some kind of higher mathematics, where in reality it was mostly just plumbing that, surprise, a computer can do too.
  - hypfer 8mo ago
    > It was wrong to write software you hoped others would use? Yes. > The entire open source ecosystem works on this idea otherwise there would be no point in sharing and we can move to closed software. No. The _actual_ open source system consisted of hackers scratching their own itch and sharing the artifacts, because (it was assumed that) sharing is free. So if the work is already done and solved their problem, why not also share it as gift. This remains unchanged. The driving force of FOSS is not "how can I fix someone else's problem". It never has been. Well.. maybe on HN it was different, but that's not "the open source ecosystem". And, yes, maybe some corps have gaslit naive people into believing that they must donate their lives to said corps.
    - danans 8mo ago
      > The _actual_ open source system consisted of hackers scratching their own itch and sharing the artifacts, because (it was assumed that) sharing is free. So if the work is already done and solved their problem, why not also share it as gift. If you have the time tona scratch your own itch and gift the results, it implies you have a source of income that gives you the time/lifestyle to do such a thing. You might be a tenured academic, or live in a society with a strong safety net. Or you might be able to do your day job in 1/2 the allotted time. The problem is that a those scenarios are eroding precipitously, leaving more to seek compensation for their work output, whether it is closed or open source.
      - necovek 8mo ago
        You think there won't be students or academics anymore? Arguably, most non-corporate-supported (when that became a thing) FOSS was created by students and academics. So what is really changing?
        danans 8mo ago
        > So what is really changing? Higher education is less affordable and accessible to more families, and the value proposition is eroding. CS academics survive by joint ventures with corporations, not by their University salaries. Escalating cost of living and reduction in institutional support systems push more people toward allocating their scarce spare time toward fundamental needs rather than contributing to the software commons.
        necovek 8mo ago
        I see your point, thanks — it definitely rings true! I agree the scale will change, but most of the core FOSS we depend on today has started off when software development was not as lucrative as it was in the past 2+ decades — which means it can still happen. It does change the dynamics as you say.
    - pmvpeter 8mo ago
- RivieraKid 8mo ago
  Sure, AI replacing intelligence (simply speaking) is good for the society on average, but probably bad for me.
weatherlite 8mo ago
Not only that, I have a feeling a lot of people are gonna be disappointed now they can implement their side projects in a week instead of 6 months. Finally - the thing is there, ready. And the likely outcome is a) Almost no one but you cares and b) Now that this has become trivial, there's no much joy in it. The struggle we had before A.I was the real joy; prompting agents for a few days and getting what you want isn't that joyful.

hypfer 8mo ago

Yes but you see, maybe all of that was wrong in the first place? This is just a correction of something that managed to remain in an invalid state for an impressively long time.

ipaddr 8mo ago
It was wrong to write software you hoped others would use? The entire open source ecosystem works on this idea otherwise there would be no point in sharing and we can move to closed software.
- amelius 8mo ago
  Yeah but we've told ourselves that writing software was some kind of higher mathematics, where in reality it was mostly just plumbing that, surprise, a computer can do too.
- hypfer 8mo ago
  > It was wrong to write software you hoped others would use? Yes. > The entire open source ecosystem works on this idea otherwise there would be no point in sharing and we can move to closed software. No. The _actual_ open source system consisted of hackers scratching their own itch and sharing the artifacts, because (it was assumed that) sharing is free. So if the work is already done and solved their problem, why not also share it as gift. This remains unchanged. The driving force of FOSS is not "how can I fix someone else's problem". It never has been. Well.. maybe on HN it was different, but that's not "the open source ecosystem". And, yes, maybe some corps have gaslit naive people into believing that they must donate their lives to said corps.
  - danans 8mo ago
    > The _actual_ open source system consisted of hackers scratching their own itch and sharing the artifacts, because (it was assumed that) sharing is free. So if the work is already done and solved their problem, why not also share it as gift. If you have the time tona scratch your own itch and gift the results, it implies you have a source of income that gives you the time/lifestyle to do such a thing. You might be a tenured academic, or live in a society with a strong safety net. Or you might be able to do your day job in 1/2 the allotted time. The problem is that a those scenarios are eroding precipitously, leaving more to seek compensation for their work output, whether it is closed or open source.
    - necovek 8mo ago
      You think there won't be students or academics anymore? Arguably, most non-corporate-supported (when that became a thing) FOSS was created by students and academics. So what is really changing?
      - danans 8mo ago
        > So what is really changing? Higher education is less affordable and accessible to more families, and the value proposition is eroding. CS academics survive by joint ventures with corporations, not by their University salaries. Escalating cost of living and reduction in institutional support systems push more people toward allocating their scarce spare time toward fundamental needs rather than contributing to the software commons.
        necovek 8mo ago
        I see your point, thanks — it definitely rings true! I agree the scale will change, but most of the core FOSS we depend on today has started off when software development was not as lucrative as it was in the past 2+ decades — which means it can still happen. It does change the dynamics as you say.
  - pmvpeter 8mo ago
RivieraKid 8mo ago
Sure, AI replacing intelligence (simply speaking) is good for the society on average, but probably bad for me.

weatherlite 8mo ago

Not only that, I have a feeling a lot of people are gonna be disappointed now they can implement their side projects in a week instead of 6 months. Finally - the thing is there, ready. And the likely outcome is a) Almost no one but you cares and b) Now that this has become trivial, there's no much joy in it. The struggle we had before A.I was the real joy; prompting agents for a few days and getting what you want isn't that joyful.