I understand that people need money to live, but a lot of the “most useful” software (as in… almost every part of the web) is open source software built by well paid developers.
Your comment might be applicable to an android lemmy client for example, but not to software generally.
Yeah they’re paid but not for open source, but from a company.
I’m no exception, as I do a lot of open source, I would go full-time open-source if I’d knew that I can live from it. But this is just not the case for say ~99% of open source, donations/funding is extremely rare and often bound to specific needs of the company that funds it.
And my answer was exactly pointing towards this, i.e. free software/open source, not software in general.
What you also have to consider is apps vs libraries, libraries are more often funded, but apps often not (and this was what we were talking about).
There are plenty of useful opensource applications, as evidenced by this thread.
Yes and now please count the amount of useful applications that aren’t open source. Spoiler: They dwarf open source applications by quantity and quality by far.
How you make a living isn’t really relevant.
I’m repeating myself: I’m doing a lot of open source in my leisure time, this is absolutely relevant, I would be able to invest a lot more time into it if I didn’t have to make a living somehow else. I directly see this with other people that were funded and aren’t anymore, so they have to use their time to make money… (and the other way around)
My point is, implying that one should be surprised to find that an app is both useful and opensource is a misconception.
People have to live somehow, without money - difficult… Unfortunately the will to donate to such projects is still pretty low…
I understand that people need money to live, but a lot of the “most useful” software (as in… almost every part of the web) is open source software built by well paid developers.
Your comment might be applicable to an android lemmy client for example, but not to software generally.
Yeah they’re paid but not for open source, but from a company. I’m no exception, as I do a lot of open source, I would go full-time open-source if I’d knew that I can live from it. But this is just not the case for say ~99% of open source, donations/funding is extremely rare and often bound to specific needs of the company that funds it.
And my answer was exactly pointing towards this, i.e. free software/open source, not software in general.
What you also have to consider is apps vs libraries, libraries are more often funded, but apps often not (and this was what we were talking about).
There are plenty of useful opensource applications, as evidenced by this thread.
How you make a living isn’t really relevant.
My point is, implying that one should be surprised to find that an app is both useful and opensource is a misconception.
Yes and now please count the amount of useful applications that aren’t open source. Spoiler: They dwarf open source applications by quantity and quality by far.
I’m repeating myself: I’m doing a lot of open source in my leisure time, this is absolutely relevant, I would be able to invest a lot more time into it if I didn’t have to make a living somehow else. I directly see this with other people that were funded and aren’t anymore, so they have to use their time to make money… (and the other way around)
My point is, that time is in fact limited…