thelinuxlink.net

Listening to the last couple of shows where Linc says you cannot make a living by writing code.
That is not true, you can can write free software and get paid, you can also keep the source code until the person paying for the software wants it.
Infact amazon is not proprietary software in the sense that nobody has a real need for it as it custom to amazons business.
The same can easily be said for the google search engine, you run the software remotely so to speak.

If i am not mistaken Dann works for Autotrader doing there website .. thats not proprietary software at all and he makes a living.

Personally i don't care if you work for adobe making photoshop but my point was you can make money writing software thats not all proprietary.

One of the points Eric Raymond used to make right up front in his talks was that the majority of software developed is for in house use and not shrink wrapped and sold in best buy or staples. Thus, the majority of programmers work on applications that will never be seen by the general public.

The company I work for uses a lot of open source software and complies with the license but they develop a lot of web based services. Thus, they are not delivering packaged software but a hosting and design service. We are not providing the customer with software, thus we do not give them access to the code. Similar to how Amazon or Google works.

I think Linc has a valid point in that it is very difficult to make money from developing something like the Gimp. How many people have ever paid the Gimp community outside of donations?

A lot of the developers we have spoken with work in their projects on their free time and have a full time job developing software for a company that is not open source. There have been a few lucky developer who have been able to merge their devotion to open source software development with their daily occupation.

As RMS has said in the past, people are not born into professions, there are many different types of non-programming jobs out there that are ethical and fulfilling that can put dinner on the table and pay the bills. The excuse that one needs to make a living by developing proprietary software is bogus.

Wally Balljacker wrote:As RMS has said in the past, people are not born into professions, there are many different types of non-programming jobs out there that are ethical and fulfilling that can put dinner on the table and pay the bills. The excuse that one needs to make a living by developing proprietary software is bogus.

I would say that the majority do not need an excuse or would call it unethical.
Most probably enjoy what they do "For a living". No one twist anyone's arm to buy proprietary software. But we in the Linux community need to continue to try to get the word out that there are other choices. RMS Im sure has done al;lot of great things for Linux, but he is abit of a Nut.

Gnarly wrote:

Wally Balljacker wrote:RMS Im sure has done al;lot of great things for Linux, but he is abit of a Nut.

You know, I find it extremely ironic that you say that Richard Stallman has done a lot of great things, but then calling him "a Nut". Because had he not been so not-compromising on his ideals, then he might just have said "Yeah OK, I can't do anything about it" instead of starting the GNU project in 1983. His strong stance is the thing that pushed him to do that in the first place, whether that's being "a Nut", I'll leave that up to you to decide.

Like Dann said the vast majority of programmers (myself included) work in closed shops where our software never leaves the company or it's clients. I make a comfortable living and for the most part enjoy what I do. Yeah, I could do something else but I like working with technology. My interest in computers predates Linux or the GNU project.

So to the software Nazis who think working in a closed shop is evil I tell them this:
"Am I evil?, Yes I am!'

Patrick wrote: So to the software Nazis who think working in a closed shop is evil I tell them this:
"Am I evil?, Yes I am!'

Nobody has said working in a closed shop is against software freedom, people refer to off the shelf software that does not come with source even after asking for it as the evil ones.
Your job is perfectly free software approved

allix wrote:Nobody has said working in a closed shop is against software freedom, people refer to off the shelf software that does not come with source even after asking for it as the evil ones.
Your job is perfectly free software approved

I'll now be able to sleep.

I personally don't care if someone makes a living as a proprietary software developer, that's up to them. My whole point is simply that no one is entitled to make a living off FOSS, and there are many other jobs out there that one could take up. It's a logical fallacy to say that, "well, if I can't make money by developing open source, I guess the only other option is to write proprietary software". It just irritates me when people present it like that.

but it is also a fallacy to say "if I cannot make money developing open source software, I guess the only other option is to not develop any software."

dann wrote:but it is also a fallacy to say "if I cannot make money developing open source software, I guess the only other option is to not develop any software."

Why is one entitled to make money writing software? I already said in my previous posts that many other jobs exist outside of programming. If the ethics of Free Software prohibit someone from taking on a proprietary programming job, there are alternative ways to make an income.

if you can make a living writing software then more power to you. Even commercial software has a limited shelf life. People who program are providing a service, Providing the service is the key point, not the status of the software. Being as astute as RMS is, I wonder how he reconciles that. I think all attorneys should work for free since all law is common. It used to be in England they did I am told. Barristers could not bill their clients. Barristers had to wait till a client physically put money in their pocket to get paid.

Patrick wrote:"Am I evil?, Yes I am!'

/me shouts Metallica forever!

davijordan wrote:Being as astute as RMS is, I wonder how he reconciles that.

He's an idealist kook?

Snarkout wrote:

davijordan wrote:Being as astute as RMS is, I wonder how he reconciles that.

He's an idealist kook?

You wouldn't be sitting there typing that if RMS didn't stick to his ideals. This board is free software released under the idealistic GPL.