(((Diversity))) in Zig Forums Funny Thread

We should just develop a patreon alternative for GPL projects, and then programmers could have a full-time job while constantly working only on free software.

I'd also like to end usury, but it's a bit hard with only wishful thinking.

Yep. The one big caveat here is that you (or your group) need to be the sole owner of the copyright. Which means you either reject all outside contributors, or make them sign a contributor agreement which assigns copyright to you.

I didn't say that. I said there is no inherent necessity for them to be that way. Usury, on the other hand, can't end without ending the system of capitalism, since this is the way we expand and contract the monetary system. This would apply even to gold, as owed gold is just as good as real gold from a properly insured source. Unless you're some kind of communist, you can't end usury, but you could argue this case and I would agree that usury is not an inherently necessary part of society, just one of the current kind. I don't disagree that the current mode of development is the financially necessary one, but I do think that it doesn't have to be this way, and that we're quickly trending toward doing things another way simply because employers are more than willing to throw programmers under the bus.

It's not a bad idea, but how do you incentivize people to donate? What is in it for them?

Exactly, this is why Linux cannot into GPLv3, because there is no such clause.

Well, they're getting good software out of it. MS and Apple are planning to rent SaaS to the user anyway. Adobe already does this. Why not put your money toward something that you're going to own and not something that can suddenly be changed to fuck you over even harder? I think that the motivation is quite clear, but we as the Free Software community have to make the case by starting to do it ourselves first.

You know, the only thing that is really stopping me from agreeing with you, in some fashion, is the GPL "Freedom" to redistribute. Remove that, and I have no problem with building businesses (read: a living for programmers) with open source software.


ahh, it's the collective voice speak again ;)

A good counter example is Sage, and it's attempt to unseat Mathematica. It has a competent developer, a Math PhD who retired from his post just to work on sage. Yet it's not popular or well funded. Why? Because people want something good 'right now', and they'll spend money on something tangible, instead of an idea.

No. I'm not an Open Source advocate. I'm a Free Software advocate. I guess it's because I'm more of an academic, but I don't like being shut out of cool shit or being prevented by the current system, especially one that relies heavily on software patents (which shouldn't even exist).

Bitch, that's the royal we.

Attached: 10775-beautiful-katamari-2[1].jpg (430x320, 33.44K)