Contributing to it might not necessarily be. Most open source development is funded by large companies after all and from their perspective it can function as a cost saving measure. Allowing them to focus on their core products and removing the possibility of their rivals from getting a competitive advantage due to having a superior low level stack under their product.
Which is why open source is so successful in areas where software is a cost-center but mostly failed for consumer products (since spending resources on them would actually be altruistic unlike e.g. Linux kernel development)
any altruistic act can be perceived as self serving
Software engineers need money to survive. If they exclusively work on open source stuff where are they getting money from to survive? Follow the money trail… even a donation… eventually it leads to an incentive based source or action.
From open source. You can earn money from open source. Open source is not opposed to capitalism, idk where you got that idea.
I said open source is derivative to capitalism. Meaning open source cannot exist without capitalism. I never said they oppose each other.
Second I said you need to follow the money trail. Money given to people who work on open source comes from non-open source places.
These are orthogonal. One can have a paid job while contributing to open source for entirely altruistic reasons.
> Follow the money trail… even a donation… eventually it leads to an incentive based source or action.
BS. Humans do things for altruistic reasons devoid of individual reward all the time.
I, myself, maintain multiple OSS projects entirely for fun and with the hope that others will find it useful. That's it, that's all. I also donate entirely anonymously to charities simply because I believe others deserve support and dignity.
This form of cold, American libertarianism you espouse is pure poison in the body politic, both in this US and globally. It degrades all of human interaction to transactions. Its no wonder that the US is where sociopaths like Zuck were birthed.
They are absolutely not orthogonal. You missed the point. You cannot ONLY work on open source for altruism. You need money to survive so you need money from a non altruistic source. Otherwise you’re not even able survive. You need to be alive to work on altruism right? So altruism REQUIRES incentive based money to exist BUT incentive based money does NOT require altruism to exist. That is the entire point of what I wrote. That is the intent and meaning behind my post. You didn’t in actuality fully understand that.
> BS. Humans do things for altruistic reasons devoid of individual reward all the time.
I never said they didn’t. Read what I fucking wrote before writing such a vile response. Don’t call BS on something I didn’t say.
I’m saying that a human being needs money to survive. If a human simply did altruistic jobs for no pay all his life he would die. It is a fucking logistical requirement that a human needs to work for pay to get money to buy food to SURVIVE. He needs to be alive to do open source right?
> I, myself, maintain multiple OSS projects entirely for fun and with the hope that others will find it useful. That's it, that's all. I also donate entirely anonymously to charities simply because I believe others deserve support and dignity.
Good for you. And none of this is possible without incentive based non altruistic work funding your leisure time to do this. You need money for food and rent and electricity so you can do your charity work for the world. That’s the only way. What I said is absolutely true and you’ve done nothing to prove otherwise.
> This form of cold, American libertarianism you espouse is pure poison in the body politic, both in this US and globally. It degrades all of human interaction to transactions. Its no wonder that the US is where sociopaths like Zuck were birthed.
Talking like this is not only against the rules here but it is some of the most vile and direct insults I’ve ever fucking read. And it doesn’t even stem from us disagreeing. It stems from you misunderstanding what was said. Why don’t you read over what I wrote and my explanation before making such a stupid comment. Let me be clear. You’re not stupid, but your reply is stupid. And your reply is stupid because of a misunderstanding. So make yourself understand and clean up your act because shit like this does worse damage for the world than psychopaths. More wars are started over misunderstanding and uncalibrated anger than actual psychopathic tendencies.
That I misunderstood your point in context is a different issue, in which case, yup, my mistake.
I suggest you practice a much greater degree of self awareness.
I’d rather speak the truth and what I believe in rather than cater to the feelings of people who cannot face objective reality.
And I didn’t openly or directly insult anyone. I criticize where it’s deserved and where it is true. He personally attacked me and I criticized his attack as appropriately as I could.
If you disagree with my premise, attack my argument. Don’t make it personal by telling me to be self aware and replying to a section of my comment not meant for you.
> Your comment is highly uncivil because it relies on aggressive profanity, condescending directives, and absurdist hyperbole to attack the other person. It lacks self-awareness because you hypocritically engage in the exact same hostile, rule-breaking behavior you are condemning.
From what I read in the rules it’s not directly rule breaking. From my interpretation here he attacked me. A defensive response is appropriate, but one where I do not attack his character directly but one where his unjust actions are criticized honestly. Unfortunately criticism is always somewhat condescending and for people to even be receptive of it you need to match the tone.
1. Profanity helps illustrate my point and I never directed at him.
2. I disagree with hyperbole. I think you’re outright lying to me here. So this is on you. You’re exaggerating things. He literally associated me with psychopaths and I called what he did a “misunderstanding”. So really you need to be more self aware.
3. I never commented on my own rule breaking behavior and my stance on the rules of HN. I just commented ON his rule breaking behavior just as you are commenting on mine while ignoring your own.
I think this is enough. I’m not perfect with the rules here but this is becoming a bit of flame war and I’m fucking done. I’m ejecting myself from this thread.