[plug] Sobering read on the reality of open source software development

Wed Mar 23 10:50:16 AWST 2022

I contribute considerably more to open source software (e.g. LibreOffice,
QGIS, Python) than I would pay for commercial software.  OK, ArcGIS costs a
lot more but I would not buy it.

A problem that open source has is that there is an increasing expectation
for a glitzy GUI, whereas a lot of open source contribution better fits a
more simple UNIX'y model - do a bit, do it right - where the contribution
might be tied to tertiary institutions or developing a person's CV.  Some
businesses have achieved stability in the "glitzy" space, that's who I
donate to.  Of course they also seek and get corporate funding and/or have
commercial arms, typically selling support packages.  That's a glaring
problem with OpenSSL - they deserve to be swimming in cash from grateful
corporates.  Why do they not receive funds when other open source entities
do?

So guys - where a product requests donations, dig into your pockets and
reduce the anguish!

Regards,
Kevin.

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 at 08:30, Onno Benschop <onno at itmaze.com.au> wrote:

> Aside from the issue that Google search is currently pervasive and
> "leaving" it seems, let's call it, "difficult", the thought of leaving
> those platforms appears an attractive solution, there is a fundamental
> issue with it that doing this does not resolve.
>
> Consider the act of making content. In our digital world most humans can
> for the first time publish their creativity, taking shape as source code,
> articles, videos, music, podcasts, 3D models, games, online forums like
> PLUG, repair guides, HowTo documents, restaurant reviews, mapping updates,
> media reports, data visualisations, and all the rest of it.
>
> Within the context of PLUG, we're often focussed around the concepts of
> Open Source Software, so let's stay there, but keep the rest of it in mind.
>
> All that content is available online, for the most part free of charge.
> For some content there are licensing requirements, but I doubt that many of
> those licenses are actually followed since enforcement requires money and
> that's in short supply.
>
> With that level of "freedom" comes a level of abuse. Some of it is
> accidental, but I have no doubt that much of it is not.
>
> You can argue that this situation evolved and given that I've been online
> since 1990, I've seen that evolution first hand.
>
> It started with individuals sharing their knowledge using email and usenet
> news. Some universities and libraries made their content available via FTP
> and Gopher. Given that most of the people "online" were academics, it
> seemed appropriate to share the knowledge around. Anyone who was online was
> likely to be employed by the university that provided them access to the
> Internet. If not employed, then at the very least a student.
>
> Once AOL became part of the mix, people who could afford to pay a service
> provider could instantly access all this "free" content, but with that came
> an imbalance. Until that moment the content providers and the content
> consumers were the same organisations. Once AOL joined in, these two
> diverged and have continued to do so in the 30 years since.
>
> Today there are vast hordes of consumers and few creators.
>
> The creators are by enlarge not being paid for their content, but big
> business is.
>
> In the way that they have access to "free" source code, or any other
> content.
>
> They can use that code to develop or on-sell a product and because they
> have money, they can outperform any little content creator.
>
> You can see the outcome of this in the debacle that was Heartbleed,
> faker.js and others. Individuals or small groups maintain a codebase that
> is in widespread use, but not actually paid for in any way by its massive
> user base.
>
> High profile products like OpenSSL are the visible part of this
> discussion, but the problem goes much deeper than this, it goes to the
> heart of how we make and share content.
>
> Changing platforms away from the "evil" empires does nothing to fix those
> issues.
>
> What's needed is a deep discussion about the value of content and how
> content creators are remunerated for their efforts.
>
> The people to start this discussion are people who actually make content.
>
> What the outcome looks like, I don't know at this point, but what I do
> know is that what we're doing is not sustainable and frankly it's
> exploitation.
>
> o
>
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 at 06:31, Yuchen Pei <ycp at gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> On Tue 2022-03-22 07:12:29 +0800, Onno Benschop wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Yuchen,
>> >
>> > My point around those platforms was around my content being used to
>> > advertise to others. Their search indices integrate my content, as they
>> do for
>> > all content they hoover up.
>> >
>> > With that, they then present "relevant advertising" to people who
>> search for
>> > things that I'm answering with my content.
>> >
>> > I see none of that revenue, neither does anyone else.
>> >
>> > Not to mention, Google maps and reviews where my updates and reviews
>> helps
>> > everyone else, but I don't see a dime.
>>
>> I see.
>>
>> Have you thought of leaving these platforms?
>>
>> Both google and facebook are proprietary surveillance machines, and
>> there are free (as in freedom) alternatives to twitter and github, like
>> mastodon, sourcehut, codeberg.
>>
>> There won't be direct income either, but at least you don't get
>> exploited by companies making money over your work through proprietary
>> software and surveillance capitalism.
>>
>> Best,
>> Yuchen
>>
>> --
>> PGP Key: 47F9 D050 1E11 8879 9040  4941 2126 7E93 EF86 DFD0
>>           <https://ypei.org/assets/ypei-pubkey.txt>
>>
>
>
> --
> Onno Benschop
>
> ()/)/)()        ..ASCII for Onno..
> |>>?            ..EBCDIC for Onno..
> --- -. -. ---   ..Morse for Onno..
>
> If you need to know: "What computer should I buy?" http://goo.gl/spsb66
>
> ITmaze   -   ABN: 56 178 057 063   -  ph: 04 1219 8888   -
> onno at itmaze.com.au
> _______________________________________________
> PLUG discussion list: plug at plug.org.au
> http://lists.plug.org.au/mailman/listinfo/plug
> Committee e-mail: committee at plug.org.au
> PLUG Membership: http://www.plug.org.au/membership
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plug.org.au/pipermail/plug/attachments/20220323/8fb13588/attachment.html>