4 ms·

Likely they got funded because they have a real way to make money! Unlike whoever offers the next airbnb for dogs. From an ethical standpoint, better the devi

Likely they got funded because they have a real way to make money! Unlike whoever offers the next airbnb for dogs. From an ethical standpoint, better the devil you know? Windows freeware developers deserve some compensation for their work, and this seems less scuzzy than other drive-by downloaders. If it became widespread it might break out of the user-exploitation ghetto and pick up real, actually synergistic software to intelligently recommend.

mercurial 14y ago
What ethical standpoint is that? That's the devil which installs spyware on your machine. So, they have a business plan, good for them. But it doesn't make them any less scammy, nor does it make it any less disappointing to see YC funding people with the same ethics as your average patent troll.
darklajid 14y ago
No, Windows freeware developers offer their software for free. Their choice. If they agree that they 'deserve some compensation' for their work, they should sell it.
- alanctgardner2 14y ago
  Why does Gittip exist then? It's funny that some developers should be compensated for the positive externalities of their work, but only the ones you deem appropriate. Working with this company would be choosing to 'sell' your work in a more accessible way. If you don't like it, don't install the bundled software and mail the dev a dollar
  - glesica 14y ago
    Gittip doesn't try to trick you into giving anyone money. It is a completely deliberate action on the part of the donor.
  - lmm 14y ago
    I'll just hack your bank account and take your money to compensate for the positive externalities of my work. If you don't like it, use a stronger password and mail me a dollar.
  - darklajid 14y ago
    Oh. Nice. "The ones I deem appropriate". No, actually I think every developer deserves compensation. But they should ask for it, set a price. The business model with ad-/crap-/bloatware is equivalent to these annoying people (I see more and more of them on the streets) that hand you a rose/card/small ~thing~ right away, shove it in your face and ask for 2/5/10 bucks after you accepted what was quite obviously a gift. You see people fall for it all the time. If the developer wants money for his program, he should ask for money for his program. Why would you even release 'freeware' if you don't want to give it away, no strings attached? It's your time, your project. Don't do that, if you want to earn money. Erm - and 'working with this company would be choosing to sell your work in a more accessible way'? Really? More accessible? If I don't like it (I don't, if that wasn't obvious enough) I remove the software, tell everyone to ignore that tool (both the software and the guy behind) and move on.
    - alanctgardner2 14y ago
      I think it's cognitive dissonance ( maybe I'm thinking of the wrong phenomenom ) that you 'see more and more of [these people]' every day. It makes this seem like a big bad trend, when really it's been happening forever and it just happens to support your point. Lots of people release ad-supported free software, not because they want to turn a profit, but because they don't want a net loss. They aren't comfortable with asking for outright donations, but a small cash flow offsets the costs of serving the download and docs, and a little forum for users. If you don't like software with ads, or software that bundles other software, that's fine. Don't use it. But I think it hurts free (as in beer) software development as a whole when you demonize any attempt to cover costs like this.
      - darklajid 14y ago
        You're mixing things up. I like software with ads (well, sorta. CAN you like software with ads?). I don't run AdBlock on all my machines. I have "free" ad-supported Android apps. Bundling ads in an application is not the same thing as installing utter, total bullshit. Your point is still very weak in my books, because you haven't explained in half a sentence why someone would like to release software as 'free' and still make money off it. The notion that this certain someone is too shy to ask for donations is .. weird. Believing that it's a viable alternative to bundle software that the end user with almost 100% certainty DOES. NOT. WANT. - seems crazy to me. So many solutions. Shareware. Donationware. Free/Premium models. Just .. not releasing a software for free and putting a price tag on it, even if just the 'app' style 99 cents. Installing crapware, toolbars, switching browser search engines and homepages etc. is an attempt to cover cost that is absolutely demonic.
tomp 14y ago
You mean synergistically spying on you, calling home from your IP and sharing information about the software installed on your PC?
CamperBob2 14y ago
Unlike whoever offers the next airbnb for dogs. Hmm. I've actually heard of dumber ideas than that. Dog owners would prefer not to board their pets with commercial kennels, because you always get your dog back with some bug or another. A service that hooks up vacationing dog owners with local families who agree to take care of small numbers of other peoples' dogs might make some sense.
- alanctgardner2 14y ago
  It would be interesting, I think the problem is that people are very attached to their pets. I have no idea how you can vet potential dog sitters, to give a good level of certainty that they won't lose/have sex with/eat your pet. It's like finding a babysitter on Craigslist.

mercurial 14y ago

What ethical standpoint is that? That's the devil which installs spyware on your machine. So, they have a business plan, good for them. But it doesn't make them any less scammy, nor does it make it any less disappointing to see YC funding people with the same ethics as your average patent troll.

darklajid 14y ago

No, Windows freeware developers offer their software for free. Their choice. If they agree that they 'deserve some compensation' for their work, they should sell it.

alanctgardner2 14y ago
Why does Gittip exist then? It's funny that some developers should be compensated for the positive externalities of their work, but only the ones you deem appropriate. Working with this company would be choosing to 'sell' your work in a more accessible way. If you don't like it, don't install the bundled software and mail the dev a dollar
- glesica 14y ago
  Gittip doesn't try to trick you into giving anyone money. It is a completely deliberate action on the part of the donor.
- lmm 14y ago
  I'll just hack your bank account and take your money to compensate for the positive externalities of my work. If you don't like it, use a stronger password and mail me a dollar.
- darklajid 14y ago
  Oh. Nice. "The ones I deem appropriate". No, actually I think every developer deserves compensation. But they should ask for it, set a price. The business model with ad-/crap-/bloatware is equivalent to these annoying people (I see more and more of them on the streets) that hand you a rose/card/small ~thing~ right away, shove it in your face and ask for 2/5/10 bucks after you accepted what was quite obviously a gift. You see people fall for it all the time. If the developer wants money for his program, he should ask for money for his program. Why would you even release 'freeware' if you don't want to give it away, no strings attached? It's your time, your project. Don't do that, if you want to earn money. Erm - and 'working with this company would be choosing to sell your work in a more accessible way'? Really? More accessible? If I don't like it (I don't, if that wasn't obvious enough) I remove the software, tell everyone to ignore that tool (both the software and the guy behind) and move on.
  - alanctgardner2 14y ago
    I think it's cognitive dissonance ( maybe I'm thinking of the wrong phenomenom ) that you 'see more and more of [these people]' every day. It makes this seem like a big bad trend, when really it's been happening forever and it just happens to support your point. Lots of people release ad-supported free software, not because they want to turn a profit, but because they don't want a net loss. They aren't comfortable with asking for outright donations, but a small cash flow offsets the costs of serving the download and docs, and a little forum for users. If you don't like software with ads, or software that bundles other software, that's fine. Don't use it. But I think it hurts free (as in beer) software development as a whole when you demonize any attempt to cover costs like this.
    - darklajid 14y ago
      You're mixing things up. I like software with ads (well, sorta. CAN you like software with ads?). I don't run AdBlock on all my machines. I have "free" ad-supported Android apps. Bundling ads in an application is not the same thing as installing utter, total bullshit. Your point is still very weak in my books, because you haven't explained in half a sentence why someone would like to release software as 'free' and still make money off it. The notion that this certain someone is too shy to ask for donations is .. weird. Believing that it's a viable alternative to bundle software that the end user with almost 100% certainty DOES. NOT. WANT. - seems crazy to me. So many solutions. Shareware. Donationware. Free/Premium models. Just .. not releasing a software for free and putting a price tag on it, even if just the 'app' style 99 cents. Installing crapware, toolbars, switching browser search engines and homepages etc. is an attempt to cover cost that is absolutely demonic.

tomp 14y ago

You mean synergistically spying on you, calling home from your IP and sharing information about the software installed on your PC?

CamperBob2 14y ago

Unlike whoever offers the next airbnb for dogs. Hmm. I've actually heard of dumber ideas than that. Dog owners would prefer not to board their pets with commercial kennels, because you always get your dog back with some bug or another. A service that hooks up vacationing dog owners with local families who agree to take care of small numbers of other peoples' dogs might make some sense.

alanctgardner2 14y ago
It would be interesting, I think the problem is that people are very attached to their pets. I have no idea how you can vet potential dog sitters, to give a good level of certainty that they won't lose/have sex with/eat your pet. It's like finding a babysitter on Craigslist.