Open-source software has always appealed to me, or at least the idea of it...now that I'm developing my own software and trying to figure out how to sell it though, I'm becoming less and less convinced that the ultimate endgoal of a true FLOSS model is compatible with capitalism.
Now I'm not a Jow Forumsfag interested in a 300-reply thread arguing back and forth so please someone just give me the redpill right up front. Is F(L)OSS basically only possible under /communism/? I mean it sounds like a great idea to just share all our code together and sing kumbaya, until we have to feed our families. Explain assuming I'm a brainlet.
Free software is compatible with market Libertarianism ethics (locke, kant etc). Proprietary software relies on Statism and Intellectual property (not real property, and it invades private property). If anything, proprietary shit is literally communism
Gavin Sullivan
It's anarchy not communism. The rational for why software should be free as in liberty not as in beer has nothing to do with the economy.
Ryan Parker
find a way of getting a profit without fucking people over with state laws, otherwise you're a commie that doesn't like about ethics.
Jose Thompson
How do we convert whole world to proper communism?
Jack Parker
This. It's not about equality, class struggle or some shit. Is about ethics and freedom, and not accepting people who do shit that's literally illegal from an ethical perspective, be it for profit or not.
Bentley Lopez
Release binary and bug solving support/requests as paid. But release source using a license like GPLv2 or even something more restrictive so people don't redistribute binaries legally. So basically your software is free as im freedom but the target user has to pay for it or have built in ads, while poorfags have to compile it themselves which few people would do. The problem would be if they can re-release binaries without ads or free, that would fuck you in the ass probably
Sebastian Stewart
Well the problem in my case is that it's trading software, with a couple little custom algorithmic things I made myself. Poorfags don't matter, but the problem is as soon as one above-room-temperature IQ individual comes along and sees the code, it begins descending into the realm of useless, as he can either use it himself which erodes the edge afforded to anyone else using it (since the market is zero-sum), OR use that idea in a totally different program of his own, for which he could sell the binaries and you'd never know it uses my algorithm.
Jonathan Martinez
If you want to make money don't ever make your source available. FOSS isn't about making money, the two things aren't related.
You can make money with FOSS, through support, but that isn't the point of FOSS. It literally nothing to do with the market. It's about ethics and freedom of knowledge. Like scientific research for instance.
Mason Jones
>compatible with capitalism You're a brainlet, first off. Anything being traded or given out is "compatible" with capitalism. You can monetize GPL (or FOSS) software just fine you just have to provide the code as well. You don't have to included assets or config files or anything, just the decompiled binary, essentially. A game like Doom is FOSS and under GPL but you don't get the entire game from it, just the engine. You still have to have a registered version of Doom to play it.
Jack Gutierrez
The market has to find it's way to provide incentives inside of an ethical system, it's not ethics that has to be bound to justify the most profitable methods. Ethics are fucking immutable, market is just technology and methods. Issue is, people will never figure out how to profit with free software if they always decide to just cry to the state for copyright help.
Mason Scott
*assuming the popular definition of communism
Benjamin Scott
most people won't just go trough the problem of compiling something for windows or android, and only a few do the compiling in linux actually. The problem is if someone forks it, redistributes a binary and it becomes more popular than yours. But the guy who is redistributing has a harder time making it more popular than yours since you can pay for pushing your app with ads with the money you gain. But still, if you worry about that you really should use a license that makes it illegal to redistribute binaries. Not everyone uses gentoo. And compiling is not feasible for a mobile app. And the app is still free as in freedom to my own concept. Some boogeyman using your code in their own proprietary app is your fear, I think that's some advanced mental gymnastics. Like were those people even going to pay you? Or are they stealing money from you? Only if their app is more popular than yours, and that has probably nothing to do with the fact that they stealed some code. This is not a matter about it affecting the gains in money it's about you wanting to keep a secret your own program. If you want to make a lot of programs with a good backend that will put the competence behind then make it proprietary.
James Wright
it is literally communism, the spot on brilliant criticism of the (((system))) flaws and retarded and (((system influenced))) way to solve it.
Owen Wright
>Like scientific research Wrong, faggot. A lot of tech companies do scientific research and patent its findings and solutions and make profit.
Jordan Garcia
this. corporations want money for everything and will monetize everything. independents are the only people around that can still change the world through free open source software. even if that software is monetized in some capacity later on making the source code free and available to all is the only environment hospitable to progressing mankind
Brody Myers
Communism & capitalism are forms of government and FOSS is software you fuck tard. Back to Jow Forums.
Jaxson Cruz
Destroy all food and sources of food in the world
Nathan Roberts
I have no idea where this false equivalency came from, but it is poisoning the debate between software licenses without any meaningful criticism. Software licenses are more akin to copyright rather than economic systems.
Alexander White
FLOSS = true democracy Niggerfaggots misunderstand it as communism
Sebastian Hernandez
communism isn't about sharing
Nathaniel Fisher
The chad libertarian Jow Forums Jow Forums /diy/ Jow Forums
The beta communist /lit/ /fa/ /lgbt/
Brandon Lewis
even hackers pay for metasploit pro
mostly for contractual requirements.
it's not communism, it's community focused programming. You can still make money off of FOSS as a consultant once you have enough clout. then it's easy.
kali linux is free but you can pay for training
Hudson Kelly
If you really have an algorithm that has a definite and long lasting edge in the markets, then why are are selling it? How about using it to mint money from the comfort of your home? Not trying to be cocky..just curious..
Jaxon White
Alot of people make money off free software. The entire internet depends on free software to function so as long as people need it people get paid to develop it. Proprietary software requires the threat of government violence to make money because something that has an infinite supply has no real value. if anything is communistic it is proprietary software.
Angel Johnson
Ah the inevitable, good old "if your algorithm works, why not use it? :DDDDDD" retort. Nah whatever but when I said algorithm I meant more like custom-built macros and stuff like that to execute sequences of API calls & measurements & stuff very quickly and repeatedly, taking that load off of the trader, who would otherwise be sitting there on the exchange's web interface punching the keyboard for several minutes if they wanted to achieve the same efficiency.
I briefly tried toying with making a "real" auto-trading algo but quickly realized I'm not one of the ones cut out to be a gold miner; I'm just decent at making shovels.
>...the threat of government violence to make money because something that has an infinite supply has no real value. What are you referring to here? The money supply, or you mean software-related "ideas" or something similar?
True enthusiasts are a minority among free/open source contributors. In the case of big projects, half the time there are million/billion dollar corporations behind the product. In case of smaller projects, most of the time the authors are at least partially motivated by capitalism-related things, i.e. having something impressive in their portfolio. 75% or so of kernel developers are corporate employees.
>Is F(L)OSS basically only possible under /communism/?
Who the fuck is going to mine the coal to produce the electricity I need to power my computer so I can leisurely write F(L)OSS pull requests at GitSoviet all day?
You can't answer that without resorting to either: A) reddit/twitter-tier braindead garbage about star trek tech that magically appears out of thin air the moment you take the power from the white men in their own countries and establish black queer tranny communism B) marxist intelligentsia tier naive or dishonest tales about how 'people will do out of their volition it for the greater good of the community/state/mankind' C) honestly acknowledging that 'well, someone will ___have___ to mine the coal'. and while I really do appreciate the honesty, that is not the fairy tale never-been-tried-before communism -- it's tried-and-true communism, and everyone whose head is not firmly lodged up their own ass is able to see how well had that worked out for everyone involved in that past.
The eternal commie wants you to equate capitalism with the monopoly man and his trust fund money bags. In reality, "capitalism" is the broad term for the effort->payoff system that's been a pillar of human civilization since the dawn of time. The societies that failed to develop that system are uncivilized at best and outright subhuman at worst.
Put a link in your program so people can download source after they buy it.
Angel Smith
>If anything, proprietary shit is literally communism >property rights are communism Why is Jow Forums so retarded?
Colton Powell
I mean you can have a FOSS model and still sell the software like GMOD.
I dont know I am a brainlet. Can anyone who has used GMOD tell me why no one has forked GMOD? It is open source. Is it the license? While digging I found an article that said Garry Newman purposely inbuilt a bug that affects pirated copies of the game. This is confusing as fuck to be honest.
Robert Cooper
>pillar of human civilization since the dawn of time. Whole post reminds me of article about how cavemen had the true entrepreneurial spirit, or the management techniques you could learn from the pharaohs of old.
Isaac Baker
More than any proprietary licenses, but still not quite. Many free software licenses certainly are good at enabling socialist/communist distribution(free as in gratis) due to the obligation to share source code and many FOSS projects are indeed free of charge, but the general system itslef is still compatible with capitalist distribution(for profit) for all intents and purposes. A proper and unapologetic commie software license would include a clause that any software using said license cannot be sold.
Jason Harris
You're coming at this the wrong way around, just like most people do. The reason free software is required is because society is off the rails. The solution isn't really free software it's fixing society. The primary problem today is copyright and patent laws, which are completely out of control.
Back when actual technological progress was actually being made, patents and copyrights lasted 10-15 years. This is ample time to make a return on your investment if whatever you've made is useful and something people want. In this system everyone wins. You the inventor become rich, and then your invention goes into the public domain so that society can progress on it. This system is also very compatible with actual capitalism. Which we don't have today. There is no capitalism, that's important to realize. What we have in every western country is a socialist/borderline communist governmental bureaucracy coupled with a monopolistic neo-feudalistic corporate infrastructure. The worst of both worlds.
Imagine if the transistor or whatever was invented today. This invention would never have led to the computer in today's corrupt societal substrate. That is, the invention of the computer if it was being invented today, would have been impossible. It would be lots of potential locked away behind megacorporation patents and copyrights, forever. This is why you're not seeing the next leap in tech. Only the steady and slight improvement of what's already out there.
So the free software movement is fallacious in it's essence. It's important and required, but only because society is broken in the first place.
Julian Gonzalez
Free software sure is possible under capitalism, but the requirement to give source code makes the communist "to each according to his need" very possible. Also asking Jow Forums about this is a bad idea because most people here get aneurysm when you even remotely imply FOSS might be commie-like
James Wood
Don't look at FOSS through a political perspective. People will try and push their politics through certain mediums, FOSS is one of them. I view FOSS as privacy and control over my device and software.
Levi Martinez
Trump doesn't take a salary. Does that make him a communist? Of course not. Communism isn't voluntary.
Dominic Cook
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MySQL >create software >release it as open source >don't tell anyone about the magic crystals that make it assrape competitors >create a company that utilises the crystals, making good money from selling services >stupid americans pay a fat load of cash for everything but the crystals >bail the american dumpster fire as soon as possible >fork the original software and sell crystal services again
