>>4 That article reminds me of one that critically snapped me out of a local maximum in my mentality: (CW: High levels of sophistry, but the few good points stuck)
I've become sort of blackpilled about free software (or FOSS) ever being able to triumph over proprietary software. Most people who believe this forget that programming, (like all labor) does not get to be free from material conditions.
The fact is most free software projects, even the popular ones that we consider successes, are underfunded and the people in the mailing lists are strained and barely manage it (think the xz infiltration.) When FOSS "succeeds" by spreading to every computer it floats up everyone, but big ships and cruises are the ones who benefit most from it. FAANG loves open-source because it cheapens the work force and because forgoing custom in-house tools means they don't have to do in-house training. It's also that FOSS cannot innovate, because it follows that sacrificing time (money) and money is a terrible deal if you also believe your ideas can immediately live on without you (viral licenses protect against being completely cuckolded but loss of ownership is still their intended effect.) Your invention or a copy of it will just become a component no one except nerds know about in someone else's big dollar product, you won't even be able to get clout from it like you can with music.
It's stupid to expect people to do quality work for free. Or the entire world to run off volunteer work. It's particularly stupid for leftist types of all people to lack this conscience.
I still hate proprietary software. Free and open source software is meh. I don't know the alternative.
That article reminds me of one that critically snapped me out of a local maximum in my mentality: (CW: High levels of sophistry, but the few good points stuck)
https://marktarver.com/thecathedralandthebizarre.html
I've become sort of blackpilled about free software (or FOSS) ever being able to triumph over proprietary software. Most people who believe this forget that programming, (like all labor) does not get to be free from material conditions.
The fact is most free software projects, even the popular ones that we consider successes, are underfunded and the people in the mailing lists are strained and barely manage it (think the xz infiltration.) When FOSS "succeeds" by spreading to every computer it floats up everyone, but big ships and cruises are the ones who benefit most from it. FAANG loves open-source because it cheapens the work force and because forgoing custom in-house tools means they don't have to do in-house training. It's also that FOSS cannot innovate, because it follows that sacrificing time (money) and money is a terrible deal if you also believe your ideas can immediately live on without you (viral licenses protect against being completely cuckolded but loss of ownership is still their intended effect.) Your invention or a copy of it will just become a component no one except nerds know about in someone else's big dollar product, you won't even be able to get clout from it like you can with music.
It's stupid to expect people to do quality work for free. Or the entire world to run off volunteer work. It's particularly stupid for leftist types of all people to lack this conscience.
I still hate proprietary software. Free and open source software is meh. I don't know the alternative.