4 ms·

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 appro

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.
    - alanctgardner2 14y ago
      I attempted it pretty well in the last post, maybe you missed it. Free software costs money to host and maintain. If you want to break even, you need some long-tail income source to cover hosting, etc. That was a full sentence, happy? People who release free software are often not hustlers. Hell, if they had business sense, maybe they'd make it a paid product. If you don't feel comfortable asking for money in exchange for your software, ads and bundled installs offer a much lower friction way to cover your costs. Charging 99 cents for a desktop app is ridiculous right now, although maybe the windows and mac app stores will change that. Either way, collecting a few dollars per user directly is a huge pain in the ass. If these companies did what they're supposed to do, it'd be more about discovery, and less about shoving downloads down your throat. I had this argument about IVRs yesterday; how do you make a good product in a field people hate? If everyone shouts down the notion of an IVR, who's going to bother making a good one? If everyone is automatically against bundled downloads, the best, least sleazy company in the world wouldn't stand a chance.
- danielweber 14y ago
  I got hit by that "take this rose, I will pretend to be mute until you do" ~18 years ago in Boston and Detroit, and hadn't seen it since. I thought it faded away, but maybe it sweeps through in waves as new people move into the city.
  - SyneRyder 14y ago
    I saw the rose trick quite a lot through Germany in 2011, but I had no need/desire for a rose so I never fell for it. I did fall for the "free US flag sticker" in Philadelphia on Independence Day 2011. Supposedly it was some charity's method of fundraising.

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.
  - alanctgardner2 14y ago
    I attempted it pretty well in the last post, maybe you missed it. Free software costs money to host and maintain. If you want to break even, you need some long-tail income source to cover hosting, etc. That was a full sentence, happy? People who release free software are often not hustlers. Hell, if they had business sense, maybe they'd make it a paid product. If you don't feel comfortable asking for money in exchange for your software, ads and bundled installs offer a much lower friction way to cover your costs. Charging 99 cents for a desktop app is ridiculous right now, although maybe the windows and mac app stores will change that. Either way, collecting a few dollars per user directly is a huge pain in the ass. If these companies did what they're supposed to do, it'd be more about discovery, and less about shoving downloads down your throat. I had this argument about IVRs yesterday; how do you make a good product in a field people hate? If everyone shouts down the notion of an IVR, who's going to bother making a good one? If everyone is automatically against bundled downloads, the best, least sleazy company in the world wouldn't stand a chance.
danielweber 14y ago
I got hit by that "take this rose, I will pretend to be mute until you do" ~18 years ago in Boston and Detroit, and hadn't seen it since. I thought it faded away, but maybe it sweeps through in waves as new people move into the city.
- SyneRyder 14y ago
  I saw the rose trick quite a lot through Germany in 2011, but I had no need/desire for a rose so I never fell for it. I did fall for the "free US flag sticker" in Philadelphia on Independence Day 2011. Supposedly it was some charity's method of fundraising.