4 ms·

>So they shouldn't hire under capitalist principles? Also note that this is beneficial for the smart people of the world, because it forces other companies to p

>So they shouldn't hire under capitalist principles? Also note that this is beneficial for the smart people of the world, because it forces other companies to pay more as well. Yes, basically I'm asking for non-capitalism (sorry, I'm a relentless anti-capitalist). It's too much for a HN thread. But I'm sick of this world - Google is a company BUILT on free software. They only exist because of public largesse. Without Linus Torvalds and Stallman (and a million others), Google would not exist, period. Without the Internet, Google would not exist. This sort of thing is rampant - github has a billion-dollar valuation based on the fact that Linus Torvalds wrote and open-sourced git, and pretty much for no other reason. I want a word that acknowledges that we exist together, dammit, that the wealth we've made - all of it - is produced in common, and that we don't use every single scrap of advantage we get to arrogate more power to ourselves. Google is a company that is built on taking a public good, perhaps the greatest public good we have ever made, and turning it into an engine for generating wealth and power for a few individuals. It's the 21st century, dammit. Let's do better. We have the fucking model for how to do this. Let's build on it. Let's share what we produce instead of taking the collective bounty and using it for our own personal gain.

mynameisvlad 11y ago
> github has a billion-dollar valuation based on the fact that Linus Torvalds wrote and open-sourced git, and pretty much for no other reason. No, github has a billion-dollar valuation based on the fact that they took a pretty empty market (source code hosting) and created a developer ecosystem around it. Whether they used git, or mercurial, or svn, or any other version control system really doesn't make a big difference. They happened to pick up on the fact that git was picking up steam and went all-in on that bet, but you can replace git with practically any other VCS and it still could have worked. In fact, I'd say it brought more younger developers and enterprise companies to git than git bringing the developers to them.
- semi-extrinsic 11y ago
  >hedged on that bet I do not think that first word means what you think it means: https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/hedge_one's_bets https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/hedge_one's_bets
  - mynameisvlad 11y ago
    Huh, TIL. What's the expression I'm thinking of for putting your bet solely on one thing? I could've sworn it was that but clearly it's not.
    - semi-extrinsic 11y ago
      Maybe "put all your eggs in one basket"?
    - DougBTX 11y ago
      You could say they "went all-in on that bet"
      - mynameisvlad 11y ago
        It's not exactly what I was thinking, but it works; thanks! Edited the post above with it. :)
sfeng 11y ago
Creating GitHub required both vision and a lot of hard work. Building Google required both vision and a lot of hard work. Yes, they use open source tools, but ultimately they built something people could get huge amounts of value from at a time when no one else was. If Linus was interested in turning git into cash, there are a variety of ways he could make that happen, but it doesn't seem like that's his goal.
exelius 11y ago
> Yes, basically I'm asking for non-capitalism (sorry, I'm a relentless anti-capitalist). Then we don't really have much to argue about on this. Google operates under a capitalist system, so to expect them to operate in a non-capitalist way is not realistic.
- hahainternet 11y ago
  Then who built all your roads? There's plenty of non capitalist activities that go on in all capitalist economies.
  - exelius 11y ago
    If Google has determined that they need the best employees, they have to pay high salaries. And if you want to get pedantic about it, the roads were actually built by a private, for-profit construction company that was contracted by some level of government. Those workers didn't show up and pour asphalt because they felt like it; they did it because they were paid to do it. In a capitalist society, even non-capitalist activities have to abide by the rules of capitalism.

mynameisvlad 11y ago

> github has a billion-dollar valuation based on the fact that Linus Torvalds wrote and open-sourced git, and pretty much for no other reason. No, github has a billion-dollar valuation based on the fact that they took a pretty empty market (source code hosting) and created a developer ecosystem around it. Whether they used git, or mercurial, or svn, or any other version control system really doesn't make a big difference. They happened to pick up on the fact that git was picking up steam and went all-in on that bet, but you can replace git with practically any other VCS and it still could have worked. In fact, I'd say it brought more younger developers and enterprise companies to git than git bringing the developers to them.

semi-extrinsic 11y ago
>hedged on that bet I do not think that first word means what you think it means: https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/hedge_one's_bets https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/hedge_one's_bets
- mynameisvlad 11y ago
  Huh, TIL. What's the expression I'm thinking of for putting your bet solely on one thing? I could've sworn it was that but clearly it's not.
  - semi-extrinsic 11y ago
    Maybe "put all your eggs in one basket"?
  - DougBTX 11y ago
    You could say they "went all-in on that bet"
    - mynameisvlad 11y ago
      It's not exactly what I was thinking, but it works; thanks! Edited the post above with it. :)

sfeng 11y ago

Creating GitHub required both vision and a lot of hard work. Building Google required both vision and a lot of hard work. Yes, they use open source tools, but ultimately they built something people could get huge amounts of value from at a time when no one else was. If Linus was interested in turning git into cash, there are a variety of ways he could make that happen, but it doesn't seem like that's his goal.

exelius 11y ago

> Yes, basically I'm asking for non-capitalism (sorry, I'm a relentless anti-capitalist). Then we don't really have much to argue about on this. Google operates under a capitalist system, so to expect them to operate in a non-capitalist way is not realistic.

hahainternet 11y ago
Then who built all your roads? There's plenty of non capitalist activities that go on in all capitalist economies.
- exelius 11y ago
  If Google has determined that they need the best employees, they have to pay high salaries. And if you want to get pedantic about it, the roads were actually built by a private, for-profit construction company that was contracted by some level of government. Those workers didn't show up and pour asphalt because they felt like it; they did it because they were paid to do it. In a capitalist society, even non-capitalist activities have to abide by the rules of capitalism.