1
jassole
45d

I welcome this change.
https://thenewstack.io/open-source-...

Make software expensive = dev salary increase xD

Comments
  • 0
    I only need to look at the state of video codecs to know that mainly closed source isn't a good option...
  • 2
    do you really believe, that people who put in the work get more money out of that?

    There will be no salary increase, but a profit increase for whoever owns the stuff. Then a profit loss, and the project going unmaintained, because it has been replaced by some other OSS.

    Projects going closed source is nothing new, and happens all the time.
  • 0
    First off, sensationalized writing, which I cannot take seriously.

    Second, personal feeling: "open source" is __not__ "free as in freedom", an important distinction, as those who call us extremists do not make GNU jihad in the cause of Allah -- any betrayal from these unbelievers has long been telegraphed.

    Third, Mr. Shoesole, the current economy doesn't work like that. It's more along the lines of work until you die and get paid as little as possible.

    Fourth, I hereby grant legal permission to anyone bearing a screenshot of this comment to assassinate me should I ever remove GPL from any part of the AR/codebase. EOT.
  • 1
    why is it a direct relation?
  • 2
    Rather more money for managers that would say what developers can and what they can’t do.

    More regulations and certifications.
  • 1
    OK, so a lot of that article is bullshit. First, this isn't a very recent thing, elastic search changed its license in 2021. Mongo in 2018. But it's being changed to restore the original balance. Previously, you sold software as a binary. To do that, you had to include licenses for open source software and that usually required publishing any changes you'd made to that software (like bugfixes) and possibly even meant you had to open source parts of your software. The requirement to do that is circumvented by cloud providers not distributing binaries or source code, only sharing with users the product of that code. This is a new business model. The license changes the requirement so that you have to share your code when the software is provided as a service. It's not some new requirement. I think the biggest problem with this approach to licensing is that the big cloud companies have the capabilities to create from scratch a competitor in a relatively short time span.
  • 1
    The ideal would be companies just share their code and fixes of their own accord, but companies will go a long way to avoid doing this (I used to work for one, the open source was such a small part of our value add that this was justified, but we still shared bug fixes). Cloud companies haven't been doing this.
  • 0
    No, you will get paid the same or less, but you will have to put some change in the tip jar for every hour you spend in your favorite editor.
  • 0
    @BrodeoCodeMan That is assuming you have the same or more number of developers in the job market pool

    That would decrease too. ;)
Add Comment