It's time to fix open source

[@marcuss.abildskov7175]

$2,000 per year per developer is absolutely nuts. A lot of companies won't even pay for developer tools.

[@hopelessdecoy]

Unfortunately true, any money for open source is good though!

[@PinguinoDragon]

dude, $2k per dev per year is a lot. maybe to the us economy isn't, but to the rest of the world it vary a lot. my monthly income as a fulltime dev in Chile is aprox USD$2,100

[@paradoxalJohn]

How is the dev market in Chile? Been there last year and loved Santiago. Is USD$2,100 a good wage in there?

[@varadkulk]

In India that is nearly 10% of some good dev's yearly salary

[@MoBeigi]

Yeah they should instead make it a % of mean salary or something, or have a inflation / buying parity adjusted minimum per country.

[@TomNook.]

The problem is OSS over the years has perpetuated this mindset that good software and utilities is free. As a result, we have so many Devs and companies who are resistant to paying good money for things they use everyday, and are making their company multiple times more in profit!

[@vaisakh_km]

in India, My monthly income is $250

[@poopman8837]

$2k per developer is a crazy amount imo

[@djbremsespor]

Yes, why even have a minimum price per dev? Wouldnt you rather have 1 dollar than 0 per dev?

[@poopman8837]

@@djbremsespor it’s a lot in todays economy dude, I’m just being real. Not sure if you meant that sarcastically. Maybe $2k per company would be more appropriate. Unless your entire product is based around the open source project itself (e.g. WPEngine) then pay a % or a minimum per developer whichever is less. Not a flat $2k…

[@cyberwoodoo9466]

@@poopman8837its a pledge not a contract they won’t be sued if they don’t pay . small companies wont care about pledge like this either way , and bigger companies spend 100 times that amount in marketing. also its per developer not employee.

[@edwardallenthree]

The fact that people are debating the number is a good thing. That means we all agree that the number should be something.

[@djbremsespor]

The 2k will discourage a lot of companies, and not just small companies. It seems like a quite sub-optimal and close-minded approach that (for no good reason?) will cap the potential support. Lets hope that this initiative is more than just PR and Open Source Washing and that money actually trickles down to the right people.

[@somerandompersonintheinternet]

This sounds good and all, but all I got from this video is, "pay USD 2000 per dev" an no mention whatsoever of where this money is actually going. Anything I'm missing?

[@David-gj6dc]

I think the idea is a company budgets 2k per dev and distributes that to open source projects they use as they see fit. The pledge itself doesn't seem to suggest how money should be distributed

[@Lorunex]

Open source is very important, but the minimum of 2000$ is just to high for a lot of companies and countries.

[@spicynoodle7419]

The minimum pledge is $2,000? So it's a US-only initiative. Cool

[@shirkit]

As always, 90% os the companies they are targeting are from the US.

[@Patterner]

and US companies are famous for giving back. open source was a mistake

[@Cowboydjrobot]

So the wealthiest software companies should be footing the bill? Cool

[@Crillemannen89]

Not really. I'm from Europe and I make roughly $3,900 per month. Paying $2,000 would amount to half a month of salary for many countries in Europe. Developers are often well paid. Of course pay varies by region though, whether $2,000 is too much.

[@hopelessdecoy]

If the initiative spread it would be localized to fit different economies.... Why is that so hard to understand?

[@jordan.ellis.hunter]

Here in Europe the 2k is more often than not a month of salary. I'm just slighly over. So this won't fly. We even had to cut down on JetBrains licences this year...

[@ristekostadinov2820]

where i live there are companies who tell their devs to use jetbrains products with license for students 🤣🤣

[@abdullahX001]

Gotta be a joke, right? What serious company cannot afford £2-300/yr for a developer's tools...

[@lawrencejob]

@@abdullahX001companies are struggling atm. Seriously

[@maimee1]

1/12 is an 8% increase. I think you could set the budget in a way that set aside a certain amount to pay for the tech you use. This includes IDEs but also Docker and these things that don't charge you money yet.

[@aymenmt1]

Where i live companies and universities tell ppl to download cracked jetbrains products 😢

[@aaron5iu9]

I'm not in a dev-tool company, but I do get a large say in what tools we should use. Things like this let me know that these companies are in it for the long haul, so it definitely helps when picking.

[@dough-pizza]

When you pulish an open source project you must be aware of the fact that: - Anyone can use your code - You wont be getting paid for it - You're not obliged to maintain the project and if you maintain it anyways you wont be compensated Now if you want fair compensation just dont make your project open source. Sell it instead!

[@reybontje2375]

Alternatively, this holds true for consumers of open-source software. They know that someone might not end up maintaining the software, which leaves legacy code behind in their codebase and potentially leads to security flaws going unnoticed/unpatched. This isn't just important for software companies either. Essentially all companies in the world benefit from open-source in some way with how ubiquitous some of the libraries are. For a security vulnerability to be ignored, for the library to remain unmaintained, or for bugs to stick around... the better alternative is if we can incentivize the vital work done by open-source developers. Basically, if a developer doesn't want to maintain their library, just throw enough money at them to make them keep caring about it.

[@David-gj6dc]

Exactly. Or just use a more restrictive license. Then at least you can use the legal system to get your money in case companies don't care to respect it

[@dough-pizza]

@@reybontje2375 yup companies can certainly do that if they so desire. But my post was out of concern for creating an environment in open source where people think they'd get a sure shot compensation for their efforts. The open source mantra should be: "You might get paid for your work but don't get mad if you don't"

[@ultimate9056]

@@David-gj6dc as if companies have to follow the law to the same letter as individual people. We're already seeing LLMs blatantly disregard licenses with no repercussion yet. Courts are quite pay 2 win, even if a company knows they can't win that won't stop them in trying to draw things out to drown you in legal fees and whenever new legal territory starts to be charted about how technology interacts with the law the courts seem to usually go with whatever dystopian idea the corporation thinks should become reality

[@test-rj2vl]

> You're not obliged to maintain the project I often see how normies sometimes complain about open-source projects as if devs had obligation to maintain it. No, we don't. If we no longer find fun in this project we move on.

[@CodingPhase]

Open source is broken I've been saying this for years there needs to be a spotify type service for developers to get paid... its ridiculous to see developers begging for money when they should be compensated period. No one should be waiting for a donation specially when people want you to maintain the projects for years and can't even buy them a coffee.

[@privacyvalued4134]

Minimum pledge of $2K is nuts. As an open source dev myself, I don't _ever_ want to see that kind of money flow in from any single source. Because the next thing you know, demands will arrive shortly afterward: Do this for us or we'll pull our funding! This site encourages the WORST possible behavior from bad-faith companies: Pretending to "donate" (i.e. give money without expecting anything in return) but really "hiring" 100 to 200 devs for the cost of one.

[@Mordecrox]

Also with hostile and petty main contributors or owners with complete disregard to contracts (WordPress and Godot to name two), what guarantee will be given? If you demand a minimum I should also be able to make reasonable enough demands.

[@nickdaboss03]

Unfortunately, I just don't see aggressively profit oriented companies willingly letting go of hundreds of thous to millions of $$ as a "Thank you" for something which they can just as easily get for free. And in all truth, it's those companies, like Amazon, who should (but wont) be pledging to something like this. And they will lose nothing for not pledging. They will still be one of the world's largest companies and we will still all want a job there

[@aryankothari4634]

funding open source maintainers, even a microscopic amount, would be insane for oss.

[@BalintCsala]

I was always wondering, what do you do about financial donations on larger open source projects? It'd be weird IMO to only include the "main team", but it's just as weird to start measuring some performance index to pay based on.

[@BalintCsala]

@@anonymousalexander6005 I disagree somewhat, while I don't see how donating money would work (though I still think it's a solvable problem), donating resources is probably easier, e.g. the way valve did for arch linux. Companies relying on open source projects do have an incentive to contribute to them in some way.

[@mindcastsoftware]

I'm curious if anyone knows what the tax implications are for a $2k donation like this in the USA? Most indy devs are not officially registered non-profits, so does it work the same way as if you're paying the dev to perform contract work?

[@KyleMcNally]

It just goes in ‘other unreported income’ in your 1040

[@mindcastsoftware]

@@KyleMcNally Sorry, I wasn't clear -- I meant for the party making the donation.

[@gabrielchuede6688]

there is Open Collective that works like a non-profit and all software projects can participate.

[@TobyLegion]

'But I wanna get paid'... Says the guy who ripped (and monetized) a complete, 3 day old documentary (except credits, of course) on his channel, with sparse yapping that didn't really add anything, and raged and slandered after being told politely not to rip the whole thing, effectivly stealing watchtime and money from them... Yep. He definitly wants to get paid, deserved or not.

[@wlockuz4467]

Damn you pulled out a classic 💀

[@lawrencejob]

I contribute to open source in some fields and don’t expect money back for my contributions. I really don’t know if this is the right thing to do. Maybe for companies selling SaaS products where open source is a big part of the value they provide in their product?

[@BlackAsLight448]

It's targeted towards huge companies making millions off the open source community.

[@lawrencejob]

@@BlackAsLight448 yes

[@wlockuz4467]

I like the initiative but their idea seems brittle for a few reasons - Donations can easily turn into expectations for a lot of companies. "we donate 100k a year to your project, please prioritise fixing our issues over others" sort of thing. - $2k / per dev / per year is a big commitment unless you're already a big company. In some countries 2k is the monthly salary of the devs. I think it should be some % of revenue in addition to how dependant they're on the software. - It doesn't define who you should be donating to - independent maintainers, teams, companies? For example does it make sense to donate to nextjs since it is tightly coupled with Vercel. There are a lot of other intricacies like this that arise due to the nature of open source.

[@aaronsteers]

I have been a paid engineer and leader at two different commercial open source startups. What the ecosystem actually needs is a redefinition of open source - to embrace protective license models like ELv2 instead of saying they aren't "really" open source, as the stale and out of step OSI foundation asserts. There's nothing not open about saying "use this for whatever you want and make money from it if you want - you just can't resale our product and call it your own"

[@kinsondigital]

This idea needs to grow in its scope, scale up, and get better. I am a maintainer of several open-source projects and have struggled to get any contributions of any kind. It is not easy being a maintainer . . .

[@thisjt]

The reason I do open source is to contribute to OSS without expecting anything in return other than being thanked for it. If you're expecting to be paid for contributing to OSS, I don't think that's the right mindset to be at. I think regional pricing should be enabled for the minimum pledge. Sure $2k, but that's waaaay more than how much people earn in a month in a lot of countries.

[@mightylotan]

That's pretty crazy art of Matt in the thumbnail haha

[@AlexGrand]

This solutions is applyable only for a big companies in US, but for the rest of the world is insane. A lot of developers is being paid less in a month than this 2k (e.g. $500). This payment will make those devs receive less money. Small companies will be at loss with this proposal.

[@edwardallenthree]

If you're arguing over the amount of the pledge, that's a good thing. That means you all agree with the initiative. In the spirit of supporting open source, and supporting the rigorous debate on KZbin about what companies should pay, I modestly suggest 2% of the annual salary per dev.

[@codeman99-dev]

Skipped over a ROI item! By backing open source projects, you get better candidates in your hiring pool! How many Guido van Rossum type characters are out there, but just not known? Thanks to this program, you'll encourage these people to apply to your next key role!

[@hanes2]

Took decades before the guy who made cURL would even get funded for his server fee he had paid for decades

[@dancarter5595]

Did I miss the part where they explained how this fund is supposed to work? How will OS maintainers benefit from it?

[@parsuli.]

Been wondering what's been up with all these creepy billboards I see on my way to work. Cool.

[@dragenn]

This legitimately scares me. I release my codebase next year, and l genuinely dont know if I'll make much money. My back up is notoriety and opportunity from there.

[@will_i_craft5555]

Well, I‘ll at least make sure my boss hears about this.

[@maz3808]

We need something like this for open source hardware as well. We also need a collaborative platform similar to Github but for open hardware people to collaborate together and innovate in open hardware. Sadly there is no such platform yet?

[@kamiljanowski7236]

Well... a dev in Europe makes 60k a year. I wish I could get these extra 2k to my pocket

[@nikos4677]

Definitely not. This is true only if you live at the top 90% richest countries in Europe. Entry level is slightly below 1000 euros per month

[@kamiljanowski7236]

@@nikos4677 fair. I meant euro-zone countries

[@nikos4677]

@@kamiljanowski7236 Lol my country is in eurozone and it's one of the poorest

[@lashlarue7924]

I'm not even in the consideration set as an ops person who wears a "dev" hat to build little APIs for basic data processing, but my company wouldn't be able to give back. We're completely maxxed out. We have considerably less than zero time with which to do pro-bono anything. How nice would it be to simply have so much excess engineering capacity (or financial capacity) that you can just give some away like that. We can't, it's a pipe dream.

[@codeChuck]

Hey, Theo, you forgot to mention, how this thing works? How they identify 'worthy' maintainers? How maintainers receive money? Do they provide their bank account or what? How are money split between OS projects? They are supporting directly what they are using, yes? Will not it leak their stack?

[@BenRangel]

So many comments are upset it's too expensive. Chill, it'll mainly be used by huge Developer tool companies looking to use the badge for marketing. You can always create another initiative for smaller donations.

[@rasalas91]

2k is too much for the people who _would_ pay. I'm a dev and of course use open source, but not as much as JS devs. I sometimes contribute and "sub" or buy people coffee, but and I CANNOT afford 2k. My company likely won't either, as we're not Software Development only (but we basically/theoretically pump out open source software). (this is also kinda intransparent? Who's getting the money? Do contributors get money? Who qualifies? How?) Make this a percentage or depending on how much open source people use or can give. Then make a "X $/dev" leader board.

[@David-gj6dc]

I don't really know if I agree with this. Isn't this the point of a license? You don't get to release your source code for everyone to see with a permissive license and then also beg and complain about money. Either have a more restrictive license or just sell your solution as a vendor.

[@TruthMcBane]

Surely there would be drastic consequences-and not all of them good-from suddenly pumping hundreds of millions of dollars (with apparently minimal oversight and/or accounting) into the open source community. A video working through these issues would be valuable.

[@VaibhavShewale]

looks interesting idea

[@michamaksymow2354]

This is a cool idea! Leaving this comment to bump this videos stats.

[@chrissdehaan]

Paying people a little bit to do something can easily make them want to do it less than if they got no money to do it. If they contribute to open source for free, then their intensives are non-financial. They they contribute and get a little money too, they start to think "I'm not getting enough from doing this."

[@clarencejones4717]

‘But first I need to get paid.’ Is basically the problem.

[@BoeRogers]

Love how a third of this vid is an ad for an ai tool!

[@mrluismartinezzz]

What is the image on their landing page suppose to represent? Is it like a piggy bank?

[@vigilantezack]

Rather than a flat $2k per dev, it should be a flat percentage. Some developers might make $200k, sure, but plenty of full time devs in smaller companies making average wages less than $100k or $80k etc. And other parts of the world less still. A simple wage-based percentage would adjust more fluidly based on how much the company pays devs and where they are located etc. Or to account for some extremes, both a minimum and maximum contribution as well, with $2k or so being a max per dev, and maybe $100/yr being a min.

[@exceedinglycurioable]

Can you have public distribution be a copy left license and then charge for a commercial license?

[@estivale8193]

software licensed under copyleft licenses can always be used commercially for free, given that the source code is provided. However, software can be dual licensed under a copyleft license and some proprietary license such that payment is required to use software under the proprietary license. look at slint's licensing for an example.

[@Caldaron]

Well, at least Matt is contributing to the shift towards financing open source, even if it's through this fiasco. Way to go ;-)

[@ScottLahteine]

I have been fortunate to have a very generous, supportive, and involved community that includes a few small and large companies, so I have been able to work exclusively as the project maintainer through patrons and sponsors for almost 10 years. Things are volatile in our niche (3D printing) but we have no shortage of work to do to push the envelope, so I hope companies in our industry will get on board with this Pledge!

[@373323]

the industry is in a rocky place is the mildest expression i heard and a year or two

[@dimlylitcorners]

Often, any commercial reward can cause your hobby to suddenly turn in something that is seen as a commercial entity and suddenly has to follow all kinds of regulations and laws?

[@Joelconway34]

I love the grounded reality of this channel!! Retirement took a toll on my finances, but I am so excited with my involvement in the digital market. $37k weekly has been life changing. Regardless of how bad it gets on the economy.

[@KuramaUchiha-id1ow]

Impressive! Been trying to trade on my own for a while now, but it isn't going well. few months ago I lost about $8,500 in the trade. Can you please at least advise me on what to do?

[@Joelconway34]

@@KuramaUchiha-id1ow

[@Joelconway34]

Yeah!!! I started t with Maira Angelina Alexander in 2021 and now my life is good some thing to write home about!!!! I thank God the most He alone made it possible for the opportunity to come my way 🤲🤲🤲🤲

[@KuramaUchiha-id1ow]

I would really like to know how this actually works.

[@amalmberg13]

I began investing in stocks and Def earlier this year, and it is the best choice l've ever made. My portfolio is rounding up to almost a million and I have realized that when a stock makes it to the news, chances are you're quite late to the party, the idea is to get in early on blue chips before it becomes public. There are lots of life changing opportunities in the market, and maximize it.

[@sumitpurohit8849]

0:47 Yeh, Theo the nuxt guy.

[@deltacubes9182]

Are you going to talk about PearAI someday, and how it's basically a fork of Continue, and added nothing to differentiate itself despite getting funded by YC? There's been so many issues around people just abusing open source projects, it's definitely an issue that more developers should be made aware of. They were able to make it right, with their apology, but it's an issue that continues to come up with for profit companies/startups.

[@simonabunker]

Do they maintain a list of projects that have benefited from this? I'm not sure endorsements are quite the same thing.

[@mystixa]

Any set 'suggested' figure like that shows it as coming from a privileged, US centric position and ignoring the breadth that oss has. There are entire countries working on utilizing open source software. To justify it Theo rationalized the figure based on a percentage of a supposed avg (for now) figure of moderately successful devs. Much better to see the value of that justification and go directly to the percentage. 1% sounds less and for many would be less, while still giving that wider set a proud supportive position that they could use for marketing as well as those that can afford to tack on that $2k static figure.

[@ricky2629]

Don't create OSS with the expectation of making money.

[@kashifiqbal3799]

I would not open source my code. Ive worked in big companies who've made stupid amounts of money from utilising open source projects. And i know theyve not paid a single penny nor paid it forward.

[@Helvanic]

2k€/year. Lol, americans

[@dontreadmyusername6787]

Yeah how is 2k /yr a lot? Even devs in India make 3 times that

[@TragicGFuel]

@@dontreadmyusername6787 no they don't lol

[@dontreadmyusername6787]

@@TragicGFuel average web dev (survey analysis) in India makes 5 lac (>5k usd approx.)

[@TragicGFuel]

@@dontreadmyusername6787 I thought it was common courtesy to provide a source?

[@dontreadmyusername6787]

@@TragicGFuel you could have just googled it instead of wasting my time. But I guess it might have hurt your ego (sorry no offense) But the source is glassdoor Its a site with job listings from companies allover the world so..

[@melekRebai]

Isn't open source supposed to be free ? Where i live 2k is a 3 months salary

[@slava_trushkin]

Can't pay bills with open source. Living expenses are a real thing.

[@roccociccone597]

@@slava_trushkin unfortunately that is the case. Or there is tons of VC funded rubbish that eventually just rug pulls the entire user base.

[@rcmnet]

Free? How long could you work full time for free on a project that other big companies are making big money every month?

[@MaartenT]

No, not necessarily. It only means the source code is open and free to use (free as in freedom). It doesn't necessarily mean free as in beer (so it costs no money) even though a lot of open-source projects are indeed free as in beer. But there are also open-source paid projects although they typically have a version you need to compile yourself or selfhost that can be gotten without paying as well. It's not free to create that software though. The problem is that those people working on those projects can not live from that which means that you either get a dev that burns out like with the xz project not too long ago and where a good chunk of linux systems almost had a backdoor embedded by people that tried to take over or your get software that gets abandoned because the maintainer doesn't have the time any more to work on it because they need to stay alive and have to work on stuff that actually pays and if that software is relied upon by a lot of companies, you have a security problem.

[@fullspecwarrior]

Where are devs earning 200K a year FFS?

[@fu5ha_edits]

Even if your business isn't dev ops, joining this sort of program can be huge for recruitment marketing and attracting talent, so it can be helpful from that perspective.

[@DavidDennison]

Love to see the ad for Bolt. Insane tool! Also love the open source push especially after the meeting with Matt!

[@royhonders]

Scary to see how good the AI tools are getting.

[@JonathanRose24]

And yet it still can’t tell how many r’s are in strawberry

[@dough-pizza]

​@@JonathanRose24 clearly two Rs

[@averagegeek3957]

The goal of the pledge is good, but I would not join it because it's associated with Sentry, a company that infamously relicensed their own software under a proprietary license after years of it being open source (I am aware that the code gets published under the Apache license after 2 years, but nobody wants to run code with potential security issues, so I think it's still very disingenuous when some people call Sentry open source, or even their own fair source terminology because it's washing the definition of these words).

[@anmolsharma4049]

2k per dev is crazy amount

[@DavidSilva-l8r]

So a lot of people in the comments seem to be out of touch. In reality software developers have a very disproportional range in yearly salary depending on their country and employer. Some of you may gain in a year what some can take 10 years to make the same amount. A lot of companies in software do not price adjust to region or country. What some of you take as guaranteed for basic work it's a luxury for others.

[@CrispyCuda]

I think this will help but I don't see it being super impactful because I think a lot of companies just won't care enough. I do like the approach of having companies pay it though, even if that comes out of developer salaries, which I imagine it probably would. One concern I have is that this doesn't seem to address that random dev from Nebraska in the comic image. There's nothing I'm seeing on the pledge site that guarantees it will go to that guy in particular. If the two larger blocks above his are highly visible open source projects, they are way more likely to get the money and then we're kind of relying on those projects to pass some of the money along. And since they are open source projects they are not necessarily going to have resources devoted to initiatives like that. I'm sure some of them do, but it's not something I'd count on. Still, I'd rather have this than nothing so I'm glad for it.

[@KyleDavis328]

"When you consider many of these devs are making over $200,000" Lol what? I don't think a single dev where I work makes anywhere near that much... I certainly don't even make close to half that... Silicon Valley economics is whack. And I'm _also_ in California...

[@attilapinter7141]

Sensing a bit of a clickbait here, but regardless I don't see how would this "fix" FOSS. It is not "broken". FOSS licensing is like this by design. Elasticsearch, Terraform and the likes who changed to a restrictive, non-GPL compliant license are ended up just crapping on the people who spent their free-time to contribute to something that they considered theirs in the name of profit. My point is that if you start a FOSS project with making money in mind you might not want to use a GPL/MIT/APACHE/etc. license, but something more restrictive like the AGPL and the likes. An alternative to this is what Red Hat is doing now where you only gain access to the source - which is very my FOSS btw - if you pay for a license. Nothing is wrong with that. However, if you're planning to be the next unicorn or whatever then don't make an opensource project, make a company. Seems super simple to me. The second you make a purchase for anything, especially at this value you will likely want to make "requests" aka demands to the project/company. This will be either welcomed, or will overwhelm the devs and drop the project entirely. You want to fix the most broken part of open source? Train new contributors, users in the ways of open source so the constant questions like ""A" feature works fine, but why it can't do "Z"??" or "When will xyz feature will be released??", "Why you so slowwwW???", "Why not accepting my PR? You suck" etc. will be cut down and we don't need to moderate the shit out of our communities to protect our contributors. (Ask me how I know....) Most FOSS projects exists to solve someones problem, or just cause it is fun. If it fixes problems for you too than thats great. Don't take the fun out of projects by throwing money at them just so you can have your way, this would just result in devs rage quitting with a massive burnout. Business is business, FOSS is FOSS. Money doesn't always help. Be respectful, contribute if you can.

[@Cyanide0112]

Doesnt this mean that companies can just fork and create their own private forks? xD

[@conradbuck2414]

You haven't at all considered the possibility of perverse incentives, or really any of the implications of what you're suggesting over the long term...

[@uselessDev]

If you open source your tool… its open source. Dont go asking for pay. Open source has benefits for devs in gaining a name for themselves and increasing adoption since the project is free. I get it and its a cool initiative - but open source exists for a reason and paying people is not one of them

[@ultimate9056]

unless you pay devs or at least help contribute to the project the amount of FOSS will drastically decline to the disservice of everyone

[@mythiq_]

Open source is just a marketing ploy used by Vcs and ycombinator these days. Most devs want to be paid for the work they've done.

[@test-rj2vl]

Cool. But we need to make it mandatory. We should make it a tax that would hit every software company whose profit is above 1 million - 1 million to give some grace period for startups. Like for example 1% of your profit needs to go to open source either as a donations or as a alternative you can hire devs to your company who would contribute code to open source projects and give ownership of code to that open source project, not to company.

[@cacophonic7]

You look very unsure about your point based on the thumbnail...

[@DavidFox]

Open source isn't broken... People's licensing decisions are broken... If ES was AGPLv3 Amazon wouldn't have been able to do what it did...

[@succatash]

Am i missing something on Elastic Search? They utilized an open source library to create a company.

[@NewbOoyNS]

So this is just an additional tax to use the tool or platform so now you are comparing value to money as well as productivity against closed source alternatives. If a company is "spending" that much per year, there will be expectations that it will be mainted and continuously developed. It's almost fully in opposite of what OSS stands for, and I am not surprised some Silicon Valley bros came up with the idea, not considering the wider international community. Not to mention, there is nothing concrete on how to implement this pledge. There is a lot of words for a lot of nothing.

[@Patmorgan235Us]

It is not a tax, it's completely voluntary

[@ColorblindMonk]

​@@Patmorgan235Us Doesn't change the points made. It still sets a shaky expectation for what is supposed to be open source.

[@RedPsyched]

Another example of Americans thinking they're the only ones on this planet along with their economy. Easy to fix retroactively here, but should've launched with PPP adjustments.

[@FusionHyperion]

bruh 2k is my monthly wage as a backend dev in western EU...

[@jacobgad1]

I would just like to say I’m very happy with the return of sub 15min high quality content. Thanks Theo

[@mrdmajor]

I think there should simply be a legal standard that if you're a business or individual that specifically resells an open-source implementation that you owe the maintainers a percentage of the revenue generated from the service regardless if the business claims to have built their own implementation after the fact.

[@FireStormOOO_]

At that point you're just commercial software, not open source.

[@mrdmajor]

@@FireStormOOO_ There's a difference between using open source to assist in building something and arbitrarily reselling it without providing a percentage to the maintainers. If the developer community can't see that, then you're 100% right, and it deserves to keep getting violated by corporations when the purpose was assisting the community 🤷‍♂️.

[@ssingh12349]

oh my god what did you do with the thumbnail

[@ewomer100]

RIP OpenSource

[@SixStringUk]

I guess everyone is saying that in the comments, but anyway... If you want to get paid don't use open source license that clearly states that anyone can use your code for any purpose anytime FOR FREE. If your butt hurts because you weren't able to monetize your project and someone else did that, don't publish your code as open source. It's a bit tiring to hear OSS people shitting on "source available" and similar licenses because "it's not open source" and "it's destroying open source" and all that BS, and then suddenly turning around and demanding their "fair share".

[@august3777]

Open source is over rated and under rated. I think it depends on the kind of support they get in terms of contribution to maintaining and improving the software. But I think that, in part, that’s the whole point of this pledge.

[@AtRiskMedia]

i'm bullish on the source-available license. seems like the most honest way to be upfront and avoid the Wordpress crises from the outset. What's the community think?

[@BenderBendingRodriguezOFFICIAL]

Do you actually go out in public looking like that?

[@monsterthrash]

If you want to make contributing back mandatory, put it in the license.

[@JakobRossner-qj1wo]

That's not how OSS works, I think you have a misunderstanding of it. The goal is not to make money or something else. This money is meant as a nice gimmick and as acknowledgment for the hard work of the maintainers.

[@thomassynths]

@@JakobRossner-qj1wo Licenses are exactly how OSS works. Saying otherwise doesn't make it less true. If you want kickbacks, encode it in the license.

[@f1945]

If you put that in the licence it would n't be oss anymore

[@David-gj6dc]

​@@f1945 That's not true? Oss, if you take the words at face value, just means you can view the source code. It doesn't say anything about everything being free or democratic.

[@FryuniGamer]

What you are describing is a "source available" license. You can do that, but then you be on a different category and it is a category where basically everyone dislikes and don't trust you

[@user-pt1kj5uw3b]

Wordpress guy was a little childish, but he had a point. This is a cool initiative.

[@winfredj9820]

he has no point. it is pure jealousy.

[@F1SHY99]

0 point. Asking a company to contribute set amount of hours to the open source project is bullshit. Asking 8% of revenue is ultra bullshit. If tomorrow Linus decided that anyone who uses Linux need to contribute thousands of hours to the project or pay 8% of companies revenue it would be absolutely insane. The entire point of having opens source was Free to use and Free to contribute if u start adding a pay wall the meaning of Open source is dead.

[@ultimate9056]

@@F1SHY99 the point is there needs to be a level of nuance. No one is demanding for individual people or small businesses start contributing to OSS in a significant manner. I don't see how it's unreasonable to have an expectation that people and companies that manage to succeed take a little off the top of that success to give back to the projects that got them there in the first place as a thank you and to improve things for everyone.

[@shirkit]

​@@ultimate9056HR Matt has no point at all.

[@F1SHY99]

​@@ultimate9056 Again I agree that companies need to contribute but making it mandatory or asking them to contribute a metric value is bullshit. WP Engine or any other company can just fork the project and move ahead. Besides WP Engine contributed to the wordpress community just because their revenue is more than others doesn't make it fair to ask more contribution . Furthermore if you actually open the webpage of Open Source Pledge there is this abomination "Whether you're a CEO, CFO, CTO, or just a dev, your company surely depends on Open Source software. It's time to pay the maintainers." Its TIME TO PAY THE MAINTAINERS if I am paying maintainers to use a product that means the product is paid if so why don't we just license it and call it what it is . Honestly at this point it feels like Open source is dying , It used to be free software without any strings attached now its better to just fork it and set up a team to maintain it rather than adhere to crap expectations like this. Open Source used to be something you felt proud about when contributing, it was about the contribution, the difference you made. Now its become a cash grab. Paying for something that's Free thought I would never see that in my life.

[@comosaycomosah]

sounds good but doubtful lol....also prime example is sony and bsd

[@edenassos]

Good, choosing beggars should not be a thing.

[@unedited159]

Why you want to be oss be source available. Things should be clear upfront based on licence.

[@lxn7404]

AWS?

[@victorpinasarnault9135]

I totally agree.

[@shis10]

Big companies must pay to maintainers and contributors. 💯

[@729usbow]

you deeply agree with the wordpress ppl then

[@ovflowd]

❤

[@mptechie]

2000$/dev/year? Yeah, no, this just calls for gatekeeping OSS for Fortune 500 or so. Not everyone works for Netflix and Google. Touch grass

[@arnabmondal3391]

$2k per dev is crazy. In india most developers salary is around $500