Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
calcifer's posts Post Back to profile
Top-level
M. The Crystalline Entity

@nihilazo @calcifer I think I lean towards agreeing with you here. Just releasing code as open source is no guarantee it’s fit for a particular purpose, the license itself sometimes states that, but some projects really need to behave like products to move further the goal of people using freedom-protecting software.

I don’t think it’s capitalist to think about a project’s UX, to try to spread awareness and consider end user support and long term goals. That’s just the sign of mature end-user software that people can rely on.

Not all projects fit that end-user role, but I think there’s value there for the ones that do.

I do love the sharing economy that underpins open source development, though, and agree that that’s a defining characteristic.

12 Jun 2023 at 16:12 | Wall-to-wall | Open on hackers.town
8 comments
soweli Niko 🔞

@calcifer @maddiefuzz oh yeah, my take only applies to open source projects providing end user software. If you're just sharing the source of your website for people to look at if they want to see how you did a thing, you obviously shouldn't need to provide user support if they decide to take bits of your javascript.

12 Jun 2023 at 16:15 | Open on chitter.xyz
M. The Crystalline Entity

@nihilazo @calcifer I’m not sure I’d categorize my take as “open source software developers are required to provide support”. Just that there’s value in considering things from that angle, for some projects.

Also, practically: people holding the opinion that developers are *required* to provide support just incentivizes there to be less open source projects.

12 Jun 2023 at 16:30 | Open on hackers.town
spooky blip 👻

@maddiefuzz @nihilazo @calcifer I think it's somewhat context dependent, too, yeah? Something that actively advertises itself as the best thing since sliced bread, accepts donations, etc. might have more obligations to its users than just some random media organizer app someone wrote and *happened* to throw the source up on Codeberg and maybe wrote a "lookie what I did this weekend!" blog post about.

The former, sure, maintain it. The latter... eh. "Fork Off", if I may: merveilles.town/@klardotsh/109

@maddiefuzz @nihilazo @calcifer I think it's somewhat context dependent, too, yeah? Something that actively advertises itself as the best thing since sliced bread, accepts donations, etc. might have more obligations to its users than just some random media organizer app someone wrote and *happened* to throw the source up on Codeberg and maybe wrote a "lookie what I did this weekend!" blog post about.

12 Jun 2023 at 18:10 | Open on merveilles.town
Kevin Granade

@klardotsh @maddiefuzz @nihilazo @calcifer it's super simple, they have obligations that they agreed to. If they promised support when advertising for donations, they should follow through. If they put up some kind of donation account with no offers attached, they don't.

No activity other than offering support creates a responsibility to provide support.

12 Jun 2023 at 19:20 | Open on tech.lgbt
spooky blip 👻

@kevingranade @maddiefuzz @nihilazo @calcifer I think this is a reasonable take too, and probably closer to the spirit of what I was thinking than what I actually wrote (cursed character limits)

12 Jun 2023 at 19:21 | Open on merveilles.town
Mike Spooner

@kevingranade @klardotsh @maddiefuzz @nihilazo @calcifer but the problem stated by the OP is that (some) people tend to expect and demand support even when none was promised, or was even explicitly and loudly disclaimed.

13 Jun 2023 at 10:04 | Open on oldbytes.space
calcifer :nes_fire:

@maddiefuzz @nihilazo I didn’t say it’s capitalist to think about a UX or release a product. What’s capitalist is the idea that software MUST BE a product, when it’s often just a way to share ideas.

12 Jun 2023 at 18:30 | Open on hackers.town
Siderea, Sibylla Bostoniensis

@calcifer

What a weird thing to attribute to capitalism. Capitalists are all for resources they can take and not pay for. Capitalist software companies were the inventors of the "AS IS" EULA which is long since become industry standard. Capitalist software companies are the first to insist they owe the user nothing - and half that if the user isn't even a customer.

Honestly, I think that demand you speak of is an upwelling of the outrage of users, including corporate users, who have been treated by corporate software vendors as if they are owed nothing by the companies that have taken their money for software - and are catching open source with the tar of a broad brush.

@maddiefuzz @nihilazo

@calcifer

What a weird thing to attribute to capitalism. Capitalists are all for resources they can take and not pay for. Capitalist software companies were the inventors of the "AS IS" EULA which is long since become industry standard. Capitalist software companies are the first to insist they owe the user nothing - and half that if the user isn't even a customer.

13 Jun 2023 at 6:44 | Open on universeodon.com
Go Up