6 ms·
After I sold my company for enough money that it was obvious I'd never have to work again, my mind went to the same place as yours. Contributing to free/open s
by sivers 13y ago
After I sold my company for enough money that it was obvious I'd never have to work again, my mind went to the same place as yours.
Contributing to free/open software is a good one.
But also there are so many pseudo-business projects that are worth doing, and not commercializing. You know like when people say, "People love it, but we're trying to figure out how to monetize it." Wouldn't it be nice to not monetize it, and just leave it as a cool thing that exists? Closer to art than commerce.
- rohall 13y agoI think you hit most developer's dream in your last three sentences. Code is art and it's a fantastic way to give back to the world (if you can afford to do so).
- melling 13y agoNah, code can solve problems. It doesn't matter if it's pretty code, or the most efficient code, it just needs to be useful to someone. Developers are tool builders, not artists.
- rossng 13y agoI think it's somewhere between the two. Software development is both creative and rigidly constrained by existing techniques/technology. Claiming that it's only one or the other is simply creating a false dichotomy.
- melling 13y agoAre you saying that it's art because it's creative? Can you simply list some of the "art"?
- daeken 13y agoLook up the demoscene. http://shadertoy.com http://shadertoy.com is a good start.
- melling 13y agoCan you show me the source that you think is art? I see lots of #define and code that looks like C source. Just to be clear, we are talking about source code itself that is art, right? Of course, source code can be written to create art. It's a tool, after all.
- dfxm12 13y agoYou can "paint" houses; you can "paint" the Mona Lisa. Don't get so caught up with the language. It's all about the mentality.
- benched 13y agoThis graphics programmer disagrees.
- melling 13y agoYeah, but all those Unity programmers agree with me.
- davidw 13y agoHey, if I've got enough money to not worry about it, I'm likely to do things right for the sheer pleasure of it. I suppose it's a bit like wordworking. Sure, most things serve some purpose, but I think that - ignoring costs - it's more pleasant for everyone involved if the end result is pleasing to look at and well built.
- midas007 13y agoSome money buys freedom, too much limits other freedoms. It's nice to have the free time to do projects and ventures for the cool factor and betterment of others. (Recommend Lessig & campaign finance reform if in the US... single biggest issue.)
- benched 13y agoI have very often worried about how much goes undone, because it can't be done for a profit. As a musician who has never made a cent from it, I know that I make what I make because I want to. I know there are people who make crazy art/tech installations, who probably don't make money. Still, I always wonder, what if any amazing things are technically feasible right now, that nobody is doing because there's no clear business plan?
- JoeAltmaier 13y agoLots of things. But if there's no business plan, then you'd be doing it for yourself. And honestly, doing something for a lot of people is vastly more helpful to all of us, than sitting alone at home with your toys. My friend Tom always asks me, when I'm suggesting rolling our own whatever (software) "Joe, we CAN do anything. What SHOULD we do?" meaning how should we spend our limited time and effort most productively. And the free market is a great measure of what's productive.
- cottonseed 13y ago> But if there's no business plan, then you'd be doing it for yourself That's a false dichotomy. Did Stallman write gcc and emacs for himself? Did Linus have a Linux business plan?
- uiri 13y agoLinus wrote Linux initially as an exercise to learn about writing kernels for i386. That it was just a hobby and not intended to be professional was even in the initial release announcement. It is also possible to view Stallman as having written gcc and emacs so that he could live according to his own moral views with regards to software. That other people benefit from these pieces of software seems to be an altruistic component of Stallman's ethical worldview but ultimately a side effect of Stallman's personal goal of not needing to touch proprietary software. If Stallman was willing to compromise on his moral convictions, it is likely that neither gcc nor emacs would exist as they do today.
- Killah911 13y agoAmen, I have personally experience how much better I enjoy working on something when I don't necessarily need to worry about monetizing it. In my mind, my non-profit work is immensely more successful and rewarding because everyone involved are doing it because they just really want to. It requires a very different way of thinking and looking at things. Money is a metric often used to measure success. Even in non-profits people start to get "metric driven", but I feel that somehow belittles my efforts. Truth be told, money is work + luck. The only metric that I like to look at is, am I doing what I can. Random dehumanizing metrics be damned, you can't measure everything!
- cottonseed 13y ago> I feel that somehow belittles my efforts. It does. There's lot of psychology research on this, intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivation, etc. Have a look at Alfie Kohn's books, like Punished by Rewards.
- Killah911 13y agoThanks. I recently read Drive, which was an eye opening book, especially when I can attest to the negative consequences of bonus based ruining of intrinsically motivated people.
- cottonseed 13y agoI tried to read Pink's A Whole New Mind, and it turned me off to him completely.
- sien 13y agoAny idea if what you did, i.e. sold your company and then did whatever you want after that is common with people in your position? Perhaps most people who get a few million do exactly this. But surely it's weird that people make 10 M and don't just do whatever they want. Honestly, what point does money after that? People like Gates, Jobs, Brin and Page might be the outliers because they keep going even after obtaining enough wealth for a lifetime. Or perhaps it's only if you have the drive to make that kind of money that got them going anyway.
- tim333 13y agoI don't think Gates et al are outliers. Most people who make $10m+ from their own efforts do it at least in part because they enjoy working and the vast majority I'd estimate keep on working in some form although they may shift fields such as Gates moving to philanthropy and PG moving from Viaweb to his other stuff. It's more lottery winners who were not so in to their work who quit and then generally run in to a bunch of problems afterwards.
- bobsil1 13y agoWhat is the most beautiful thing you could make?
- jsudhams 13y ago@cottonseed @sivers Nit sure where are you from but if you can help 1. create softwares in our lanaguage (Tamil or any indian language) it would be greatly helpful for us to keep the language for another couple of centuries atleast. It lived for more than 2000+ years but i think it will go extinct soon. There is enourmous amount of knowledge in there with lot of empazize on some personal life , profesional life and governance. I think if you can make your effort in this area it will be great. For example we have something called Thirukkural which i feel covers anything that would ever need to be written about managing your life and i see no reason for any more new MB concepts. The other option (very very interesting and may be fulfilling) is that try changing the country , given that you say you dont attention and i think you are either capable of making lot of money or already have money. Then setup an corporate empire in our country (India) and drive politics to the better side (you can be in the backgound orchestrating). I think India is the largest country with large population which will fall in love for good governance and reasonable life of course the current scenario is changing the slightly due to west model being copied but it is not yet too late to change it.