From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,afb4d45672b1e262 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news4.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.megapath.net!news.megapath.net.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:59:47 -0500 From: "Randy Brukardt" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <7NOdne-iYtWmIafZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@megapath.net> <292bf$443bb4e4$45491254$20549@KNOLOGY.NET> Subject: Re: Making money on open source, if not by selling _support_, then how? Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:59:54 -0500 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.32.209.38 X-Trace: sv3-QRtWCjCclfxFNXu5su0Rb0i09CqcLN0ko670tX+eS5YesZ8MoCpvH+Pr2LMA126rNW+qcPMLUi1ktU5!jxrkNYn3CEvb5W6UcRyqfDzxLU7R4MPdfLVqJlNvaS+bgCY/uY8g8xsFBuSp9dBGxgR8NPvLCKOg!M/W4q388O+YBzw== X-Complaints-To: abuse@megapath.net X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@megapath.net X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.32 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3779 Date: 2006-04-11T14:59:54-05:00 List-Id: "Justin Gombos" wrote in message news:z5S_f.4049$XI6.1174@trnddc05... > There are intrinsic rewards with creating GNU software. When you say > "rewarding" here, are you talking purely in terms of remuneration > (that is, extrinsic rewards)? I don''t see any reason to restrict the intrinsic rewards to "GNU software". I've stuck with Ada (despite the high probablity that I could make more money doing something else) simply because I find Ada better, more fun, etc. than the alternatives. But that doesn't provide a means of support. No matter what benefits to overall society there are, if the individual creators cannot support themselves, they'll have to do something else. Which means no creations at all. It's this argument that tars "open source" with the "communist" label (since that is the only way to decouple means of support from the act of creating software). And, in any case, it's unrealistic. I don't see any intrinsic reason that "open source" has to be incompatible with capitalism, but it's quite important that the creators get some of the rewards. In the current world, it is the leeches of the world (marketers, lawyers, etc.) that get most of the money; the creators get little of it. Open source seems to change that equation to ensure that the leeches get *all* of the money. (I presume that's the *real* reason it has become popular...) I'm less concerned about that in cases where there is no money (such as most Ada utilities libraries). 100% or 0% of nothing is still the same amount... Randy.