5 ms·

It is a sense of entitlement, but it's far more reasonable. If you spent years working on a codebase which at least a few people liked enough to use, is it real

by rudolf0 12y ago

It is a sense of entitlement, but it's far more reasonable. If you spent years working on a codebase which at least a few people liked enough to use, is it really worth dumping all that code in the trash for all of eternity just because you'd incidentally end up capitulating to some obnoxious people when you open source it?

nirvdrum 12y ago
Setting aside the licensing issues, and assuming it's just because I don't feel like dealing with obnoxious people, something still doesn't make sense to me. Prior to announcing the shutdown, no one had access to the source. I've made a lot of it available since then, but not all of it. Today, they still don't have access to that source. How is society any worse off? Unless your belief is simply that all code should be open source. And that's fine, but then it doesn't really seem tied to the shutdown of the company.
- rudolf0 12y ago
  No, I don't think all code should be open source at all. Humanity isn't worse off for it if you don't release the source, but you could potentially make humanity better off by releasing it. If you keep it to yourself forever, never to be used or seen again, you reduce the chance of helping someone's project or improving someone's life to 0%. If you do release it, there's that chance that a few people out there will borrow some of its ideas to help them out, or perhaps they'll actually use the entire codebase so they don't reinvent the wheel. This could save them a lot of time and effort. Or maybe a non-coder will use it because they genuinely want to use the app. And who knows, maybe it'll be a lot more than a few people. It's just a bit existentially sad to essentially lock all that code produced out of so many man hours in a little sphere that is never opened again. For a good example of this, look at Isaac Newton's unreleased works. If you really don't want to appease obnoxious beggars from companies, you can just release it with a license that restricts all, or certain kinds, of commercial use.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
throwawayaway 12y ago
It's totally unreasonable for them to try and make some moral argument that they should be allowed to have it if they aren't willing to pay. Absolutely, yes it is worth hanging on to. "Dumping it in the trash" is such a biased metaphor. Having self respect and not being a pushover pays gains in the long run, so yes it's worth it.

by rudolf0 12y ago

nirvdrum 12y ago

Setting aside the licensing issues, and assuming it's just because I don't feel like dealing with obnoxious people, something still doesn't make sense to me. Prior to announcing the shutdown, no one had access to the source. I've made a lot of it available since then, but not all of it. Today, they still don't have access to that source. How is society any worse off? Unless your belief is simply that all code should be open source. And that's fine, but then it doesn't really seem tied to the shutdown of the company.

rudolf0 12y ago
No, I don't think all code should be open source at all. Humanity isn't worse off for it if you don't release the source, but you could potentially make humanity better off by releasing it. If you keep it to yourself forever, never to be used or seen again, you reduce the chance of helping someone's project or improving someone's life to 0%. If you do release it, there's that chance that a few people out there will borrow some of its ideas to help them out, or perhaps they'll actually use the entire codebase so they don't reinvent the wheel. This could save them a lot of time and effort. Or maybe a non-coder will use it because they genuinely want to use the app. And who knows, maybe it'll be a lot more than a few people. It's just a bit existentially sad to essentially lock all that code produced out of so many man hours in a little sphere that is never opened again. For a good example of this, look at Isaac Newton's unreleased works. If you really don't want to appease obnoxious beggars from companies, you can just release it with a license that restricts all, or certain kinds, of commercial use.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

throwawayaway 12y ago

It's totally unreasonable for them to try and make some moral argument that they should be allowed to have it if they aren't willing to pay. Absolutely, yes it is worth hanging on to. "Dumping it in the trash" is such a biased metaphor. Having self respect and not being a pushover pays gains in the long run, so yes it's worth it.