← Back to context

Comment by smashed

4 months ago

Keep in mind that they probably use it or at least discovered it explicitly because it's open source. So either you don't release it and they use something else, or you release it and they use it. Option 2 sounds like giving you more exposure and more opportunities in the long run.

12 comments

smashed

Reply
pentamassiv  4 months ago

Sure, it would be hard to monetize and while it took countless hours to iron out many of its bugs, it is definitely not rocket science. I contribute to open source software expecting nothing in return because all software I use is also open source. It's my way of giving back and I love the knowledge that it is useful to people and hearing about their projects. So far I did not have any benefits from it but continue doing it anyways. It makes me happy to see more and more people using it.

kunzhi  4 months ago

[flagged]

  • smashed  4 months ago

    Why so harsh?

    I'm not advocating in doing it for the exposure as a primary reason. And absolutely not to be paid in exposure. 100% agree with the comic there.

    I should not have used that word. It is clearly charged with negativity.

    Of course I wish everyone would be compensated for their work. I feel that for some types of project, publishing as open source is a great way for people to find and use it. This can give new opportunities.

    Exactly which kind of project and under which conditions is up to debate.

    I have worked on a few projects that I regret not being able to open source. Mainly not my choice, stakeholders wanted traditional go to market strategies and failed/ran out of money trying to make sales. I can't help but thinking what other opportunities could have arisen have we chose another strategy.

    • kunzhi  4 months ago

      Thanks for your reply. Yep, you got me with that word. Exposure has become totally toxic to me, just like "merit."