> users who we all know are, in fact, entitled to get everything for free
That kind of thing is explicitly required under HN rules - if a company requires payment, it's only OK to post if a “workaround” to avoid paying is available.
Additionally, HN explicitly say it's OK:
* For HN comments to ask how to get around payment requirements, and
* For HN users to help other users to get around payment requirements
Thank you for saying this. It's literally insane to me how thoroughly entrenched this sense of entitlement has become. It's at the point where it can't even be parodied, because a chunk of society, maybe even the majority, seriously holds the view that they are entitled to any software thing they want for free.
If he wants revenue he can restrict his product to paying users. Double dipping with the popularty of free access only to abuse users with spychological manipulation spam should never be accepted.
Depending on your definition, shareware models have been around for 40 years at this point. If you disagree with the terms, don't use it. That's a personal decision though, not a global moral position.
How dare a developer expect revenue for his work, especially from users who we all know are, in fact, entitled to get everything for free.
> users who we all know are, in fact, entitled to get everything for free
That kind of thing is explicitly required under HN rules - if a company requires payment, it's only OK to post if a “workaround” to avoid paying is available.
Additionally, HN explicitly say it's OK:
* For HN comments to ask how to get around payment requirements, and
* For HN users to help other users to get around payment requirements
Source: Official HN FAQ page
Why should HN be allowed to have rules on what content is allowed to be posted? People are of course free to not post.
Thank you for saying this. It's literally insane to me how thoroughly entrenched this sense of entitlement has become. It's at the point where it can't even be parodied, because a chunk of society, maybe even the majority, seriously holds the view that they are entitled to any software thing they want for free.
I once posted a joke about how I love leaving shopping carts everywhere so that cart pushers have a job, and got enthusiastic replies supporting me.
2 replies →
If he wants revenue he can restrict his product to paying users. Double dipping with the popularty of free access only to abuse users with spychological manipulation spam should never be accepted.
Depending on your definition, shareware models have been around for 40 years at this point. If you disagree with the terms, don't use it. That's a personal decision though, not a global moral position.
If you want to use it despite the ads, use it.
If you don't, don't.
It's that simple. Be an adult, make a choice and live with it.
2 replies →