undefined

points

[-]

Somebody's got to do the dirty work, like fixing sewers. That's why we pay people, because they don't want to work for free.

And I speak as someone who has been contributing to open source for decades.

No, I am not going to mow someone else's lawn for free, unless they are a friend. And nobody is going to fix the blown head gasket on my car for free. Nor would I want them to.

Humans (likely) started out by trading favors. Then upgraded that with barter. Barter is pretty inefficient, so money was invented. A complex society cannot run on favors.

by M95D10 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

> Humans (likely) started out by trading favors. Then upgraded that with barter. Barter is pretty inefficient, so money was invented. A complex society cannot run on favors.

That's not exactly how it was. I recommend reading "Debt: The First 5,000 Years" by David Graeber. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt:_The_First_5,000_Years

by komali211 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

> Somebody's got to do the dirty work, like fixing sewers. That's why we pay people, because they don't want to work for free.

I actually know a guy whose job it is to empty septic tanks, and he LOVES telling people super gross stories and leaning into his capabilities as someone to not be bothered by what he deals with on a daily basis. Watch that old show "Dirty Jobs" for lots of other people that think similarly.

Nobody wants to serve someone else's profits for nothing in return. That wrinkle kills a lot of FOSS motivation, when Micro$oft snaps up your project and starts raking in millions without a cent going to you. That's obviously unfair, and one things humans are very good at is telling when something isn't fair.

My overall point is, when controlling for baseline maslow, and ensuring there's no unfair labor exploitation, in a situation where we need plumbers, someone will be attracted to the vacuum of need, because humans love being needed, and love doing useful work.

by brabel7 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

It’s interesting how we feel unfairly treated when we publish software for free, with a license that clearly states that others can do anything with it, and others go and do whatever they want, like you said they could, but only when it involves monetary benefit to them. Thinking about it, it really makes no sense. Why do we feel upset about that? It feels like we’re lying to ourselves. We didn’t really mean you can do anything! Come on, read between the lines! Hm, sorry but I cannot condone this attitude. There is a license that says what you more likely meant, that’s called GPL. But people seem to rarely use that. Humans are intrinsically contradictory in their behavior.

by rafterydj4 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Don't leave out the common pattern of licenses being completely ignored by for profit, closed source competitors - where the only recourse is through the courts (costing the open source team money and resources) or even worse, the competitor being a different nationality so there's no legal options for you.

by WalterBright11 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

I'm sure there are people who love working in the sewer, like Norton.

But I doubt there are enough to fill the need for them.

I contribute to open source. I made my peace long ago with someone using what I wrote to make money. (In fact, it pleases me if they make money off of it!)

If you contribute to open source, but get mad that someone is using it without paying you, then you did not contribute in good faith. It's like those religious cults who will press a "free" book on you, and then demand a "donation".

by za_creature9 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

This was only ever true in the form of a "take a penny, leave a penny" jar.

You don't necessarily mind people profiting off of your contributions because you have been profiting from other peoples' contributions at your job. Take away the jobs and suddenly there isn't enough grant money to go around to keep the lights on.