@@robertfletcher8964 it should be free to get educated. that doesn't mean educational material should be provided without compensation. it just means the funding should come from somewhere else. having an educated population increases productivity so the expenditure pays for itself in the long run
You can't say that Prime is not a magician, and then watch how he summons a couple of experienced devs with his hat and sheer force of will. You just cannot.
1000% with Rich on this. I have several open source projects and I love LISP. There are a lot of "know it all" jerks in the open source world that demand other people do what they want. Not just users or corporate leeches. There are some maintainers/committers that are toxic jerks to everyone.
@Dredge22 That's pretty insane. If most people have a problem with him, shouldn't they vote to kick him out? I'd probably just leave the project, I don't have the patience for that sort of thing lol. Especially if I'm not getting paid
I think the classic example is systemd in Linux. It doesn’t matter whether systemd sucks or rules, the Linux community has been packed with people attacking the distributions that use it. If you don’t like what Debian does, the only option that doesn’t make you a jerk is moving to something else. It’s free software. The only classy option is to release your own distribution without it. I love Void, Guix, and Devuuan for doing that.
There was a LOT of this kind of entitlement in minecraft modding. Like, I've seen people directly tell a mod author, "You don't own the mod. Ever since you uploaded it, it belongs to the community and you have a responsibility to maintain it!" It's ridiculous.
Not code, but a few years ago I had released a font commercially and during the time I was working on it people were explicitly telling me I should release it for free and/or open-source because it wasn't originally my design even though I was the one putting in the effort to not only make it digitally (it was the first commercially available version of that design in nearly twenty years) but also expand it far beyond its original character set. I explicitly told them to kick rocks because if they wanted it free they should've done it themselves, then it would've been _their_ choice what to do with it instead of mine.
Open source software is amazing. It fucking cool that some developers take time out of their free time to develop free applications that in some cases are even better than the competition in my opinion.
For some creating a language is their life's work. That kind of dedication has to be appreciated. It has to be a labor of love since the odds of any traction is akin to winning the lottery given well entrenched incumbent languages.
0:23 That's a strawman. When people say education should be free, most of the time they don't mean people working in education should not be paid, but that they should be paid by the state, not their students. It's free in the student point of view, not in general. Same with healthcare. A lot of countries work like that.
Yeah that was a terrible take. Obviously if someone makes a course on SkillShare and tries to sell it doesn't need to be free. But primary, secondary and tertiary education should be free for all students.
You're strawman his strawman. This isn't the basic or essential education/ healthcare. This is extra learning, studies, and higher education. Just cause you want gold teeth doesn't mean you get em for free. You do get to learn to brush your teeth and how to floss. 😂
@@CheCortezTV I agree extra / alternative learning (meaning Udemy or SkillShare for example, as pointed out by Kordishal) doesn't have to be free, but I didn't see him specifying that, only education in general. Anyway, their cost is often absurdly low so I'm not sure why people would have a problem with that. I mean of course there is Twitter so it probably happens, but still lol However higher education (meaning university) can absolutely be free.
That doesn't make the statement you are talking about a strawman. It makes the person saying these things' view of taxation and money in general a strawman. Things aren't free because they are paid for by someone else. And they aren't even free to you specifically if they are paid for by taxes. They are simply accessible, and the cost is defered or distributed or both. But beyond that the only people who aren't entitled to education subsidy in the US (which often pays MORE than tuition) are people who 1) won't accept the type of education that is free to them (community college) 2) won't comply with the rules set forth by the people that issue the subsidies (academic standards) or 3) Can already afford to pay for this themselves.
@@Kordishal Should ALL primary, secondary, and tertiary education be free for ALL students? Or should there be reasonable options for people that meet reasonable minimum requirements? Because you can (and we do) already have this in most of the places where people say these sorts of things. We just do not provide completely unqualified access to infinite educational funds to arbitrarily unteachable/uncooperative students.
Glad that she asked about open source contributors seeking feedback. A lot of FOSS contributors coming from the outside really do have good intentions, they just may not be queued into dev social norms yet. I mentioned in another comment that my company maintains an open source library, so I do keep that in mind. Not everyone has access to a mentor, and that could be the next best thing.
Licensing and copyright/copyleft are where this starts to get super hairy. IANAL of course but I think that’s even more of the reason why this whole space needs to have more clarity because it’s so hard for your average dev to have any sense of what the hell is an appropriate licensing setup based on what people are using the tool for Apache projects are also an interesting set of projects I’m curious about. There are so many tools they provide which are used so extensively and knowing where and when the line needs to be drawn from version to version. Specific changes to APIs vs security updates vs more broadly having families of tools that all interact with each other in meaningful manners is super appealing but theres also the large corporate interests in those projects that is always something that’s a question
This comes down to the continuing confusion about the difference between Free and Non-Free, Open and Non-Open software. ALL that the Open in Open Source means is that the copyright owner grants you a limited set of rights to SEE the source. ALL that the Free in Free Software means is that the copyright owner grants to u a limited set of rights to USE the source. (Yes there is overlap and they do sit on a spectrum!)
Prime immediately with the Libertarian take. „Education should be free“ does not mean we need an education Stasi that goes after people wanting to earn money with their educational stuff. It means the government should probably pay for it because it and society at large have a major direct incentive in having the most educated citizens possible. An educated citizen is more productive (in that you can have more high-skill industries which can demand higher prices), they are less likely to commit crimes and are probably just better citizens overall. The annoying thing is that most of these things are not priced in to the more free market based system the US has. Every Milton enjoyer should understand that this is a problem. Education has such an outsized positive effect on social cohesion, a states wealth, taxes even voting behavior that it is in a states best interest to provide it to the people for free at point of consumption and then finance it with future tax income. So if someone makes high quality education material, they should not be forced to give it up for free but the state is heavily incentivized to pay this person to offer it for free or at a reduced cost,.
My company inherited an open source library to maintain. We have a template that includes test suite run results and we don't accept the submission until that's run, and require new tests for new use cases. We accept that if it's something we need for our business, we'll get to it ourselves, so we can reject low-effort, short-sighted PRs.
good one. I think there is another component to this too. Seems like the open source community gets bleed over from other developer communities. People come in with the same expectation that they had in other similar settings but perhaps they lack the awareness to notice they are not in those settings anymore.
I totally agree with the article BUT... If you are an open-source developer with a project that is depended upon by thousands or millions of people, then you are pretty much guaranteed to piss people off if you willfully ignore the community. I'm not saying you are obliged to implement the whims of the community, but don't be surprised if devs get outraged when one of their core dependencies does something insanely stupid. This is supposed to be when forks happen, but nobody really *likes* forks to happen, you know?
Imo, there are at its core two kinds of open source projects. Also, before somebody reads this, I am not sure I am good at explaining this (I am generally kinda bad at putting my thoughts about topics like this into words). For one, there is the type of projects somebody throws into the open and manages it the way they want, they may engage with a possible existing community or not. I am going to call this type "pet project" here. Then, there is the type of projects somebody starts but wants it to grow into "something more" (be it from the get go or change to that later on). The goal is to be widely used, have a community around it etc. I am going to call this type "community project" here. Technically there are also the "Frankenstein projects" which advertise themselves as one of these two but act like the other. This often ends kinda toxic and bad for everyone involved and imo you should try to stay away from these, even if only for your own well being. "Pet projects" have a few advantages: - narrow vision - clear responsibility (which can reach from "nothing" to things explicitly stated (e.g. a see from time to time projects which basically ignore everything besides CVEs)) - the owner can basically act however they want to (well, as long as it's not illegal) but they also have disadvantages: - it's harder to build a community around it - it's hard to grow - wide usage is not only accidental but can actively damage the project - likelihood of many forks is high "Community projects" have their own set of advantages: - a community can share certain tasks, lessening the workload on a single individual - since more people contribute to it, it can be more widely useful (basically everyone tries to adds stuff they care about) - more diverse set of ideas and approaches to problem solving (after all, an engineer is likely to have a considerable different approach than artist) but they also have disadvantages: - they can quite a mess (e.g. who tries to keep the documentation up to date?) - people can be quite the asses (after all, you DO advertise yourself open to other ideas, so why do you say no without explanation? or why do you ignore somebodies needs when your goal is for it to be as widely used a possible?) - maintainership means that you pledge yourself to do stuff So, when you go and do/create an open source project (or contribute to one), be explicit what kind it is and act accordingly. And if you are unsure what kind you want, go with "pet project" first, you can easily make it into a "community project" later on, but not so much the other way around.
"Clojure never had a breaking change", if by that "syntactically" was meant, that's less impressive than it sounds with Clojure being an S-Expression language. If they mean the standard library, I guess it means they never significantly fix anything, only creating workarounds and alternatives, again less impressive than it sounds. Of course I could totally be wrong, and they just created the one single perfect future proof implementation of anything on the first release. Which sounds like magic. Or aliens. Or deliberately obtuse definition of "breaking change".
I like that clojure doesn't break stuff like Scala or many open source projects. We all know popular OSS that break stuff and cause loads of grief. I've lost count of how many customers had spark stuff break because of Scala breaking changes.
@@X_Baron Java has very few breaking changes though, and the ones that it does have is announced years in advance, so it's pretty good about this stuff too. But sort of, yes.
The phrase they say indicates the end of a transmission. So if you used the word as part your message it could be construed as prematurely ended. Over.
PHP seems like it isn't the language for me since there are breaking changes every update though I'm purposely using simplistic syntax and none of the new features... Clojure where have you been my entire career lol?!
0:30 it applies to *_everything_* (at least every situation involving consenting parties) If I see another tweet that has #RtR in it, "sent from my iPhone" I will fucking lose it; take accountability & buy from companies that offer features you want, or shut up. If you want repairability, buy a repairable device. I like privacy, security, freedom, etc. so I use linux, if you want repairability you can buy a fairphone. (Or more realistically just buy a phone as repairable as you want based on your relative weighting on repairability as a feature compared to others) I am not going to demand Microsoft be forced to make what I personally want, because thats not a right I, or anyone else, has. If it's your problem, it's your problem to fix; If you genuinely can't then thats a conversation that can be had, but if you can buy a 1500 dollar phone you can buy a 500 dollar phone.
Im not sure your education example adds up. For that one, dont you think it might be a good idea fof governments to invest in making as much education as possible open to all, and use the tax payers money to compensate the author for a better society? Im nkt saying im against udemy or whatever. I just feel like you chose the absolute worst example, eduxation, and did a disservuce to your argument. Creative works might have been a better analogy.
@@eppi6328It still feels like he conflated the “everyone says” and the examples of “good quality courses”, at least personally I haven’t seen much of that compared to complaints about child education costs
Inventors of said technology should have the authority to make it free. But the USA was built on piracy and being wrong. Everything has a time limit to claim proprietorship.
The petulant manchild energy the author gave off. It's incredible how he can say things that are largely true, and yet say it in the bitchiest way possible.
Imagine if all that time and work that went into Linux and in the end it was packaged and wrapped with a price tag. World would be a bit different for sure. The more information available the faster society progresses. But because of some very bad laws. We have copyright that basically never ends when originally it was a max of 28 years. Also yes education should be "free" wasn't that the idea of Libraries? We should subsidize education in our country not put paywalls in front of it. We wonder why our country is in the shape its in. We should be sending the youth to the most high end educational structures. We all pay taxes how about it go to something this rather than wars, or dead end research studies. I am also not saying that we should just be entitled to "free" stuff either. Back in the day they used to give schematics with hardware that was bought. Even software came with extensive manuals and even source code. Now we buy software with no information as to what it is even doing under the hood. This is why they fight so hard against right to repair. Our money don't go as far and we get less of a product that just collects our data and makes a profit of it. Seems to me its not about good software when money is involved but more about the data they can collect from you. Most software I use is opensource and I try to donate anytime I have the chance to such projects. I try not to buy any software unless the source code is also included. I can't stand the fact that companies and even some programmers I know think its OK to be able to buy software and not have the right to the source code. Imagine buying your car and you are not allowed to open the hood or do any work on it your self. They say "you wouldn't copy a car if you could so why would you do it with software". I say the hell I wouldn't. If we could just copy and past our cars we all would do it. We honestly just need to create a dialog and fix this as in the end it will benefit the country and the people that create this place. Keep up the good work though. Watch your videos quite a bit. if you ever get a chance it would be amazing if you could do a video on David Beazley: Discovering Python - PyCon 2014 video here on UA-cam. I know its a bit older but it was the video that made me begin to learn Python as I found it amazing. Curious on how you and your viewers would have handled his problem with your languages of preference. If at all. God bless!
This is ILLEGAL, yol procrastinate in the save haven of having an actual JOB?!?! MAKE KIDS!! We need more N-S-A-gifts ... Nice one, thx for sharing! P.s.: @ThePrimeTimeagen - such a smooth sailing over the text, what's going on? Extra effort or was it the font that did you good?
"post scriptum", an anachronism from the time of long hand and, potentially, typewriters where going back and adding something you forgot wasn't as easy as when using a text editor.
Most people arguing for free education are talking about free higher education, not commercial educational materials. ⚠️TRIGGER WARNING ⚠️ "Free," in this context, would mean taxpayer-funded. It's this strange phenomenon where humans organize and set aside a certain portion of resources for the betterment of the next generation, helping to disconnect children's educational outcomes from their parents' class and financial situation.
@Dredge22 regarding behavioral differences - show us your study, how much data you took in, etc. Also show us how the outcomes are affected by people who worked hard to get those scholarships, because a lot of them are competitive and you have to work for them. TBH, sounds like anecdotes at best, and at worst a pure fabrication to support your world view. I'm leaning towards the latter because I suspect people on earned scholarship are VASTLY different from people with rich parents. I'm pressing X to doubt.
@Dredge22 There are costs and benefits to funding higher education, just as there are costs to having an uneducated population unable to compete for jobs on a global stage. No issue you raised made taking the route unviable or demonstrated the approach would be statistically counterproductive, but instead, mostly revolves around a separate issue which sounds suspiciously similar to a culture war item.
@Dredge22 Your definition of hard work including payment is telling. It is of course completely not about labor but on a held belief that payments give people sense of responsibility. Being able to commit to a loan (or having parents support it) is definitely not equivalent "work" or "merit" than getting any kind of scholarship, including those you believe are not merit based (but will in fact depend on merit cause it's not like those scholarships dont have a limited number of slots for which people compete, even when reserved for certain communities).
Education should be free, not forcing people to give their work for free, but we should find a solution where, everyone can teach everyotherone their skills. Knowledge exchange should be made easier.
Free as in we pay for it with our taxes! People will thinks is the same bus is not for: A: economy of scale B: we can redirect or money from something else like do we need more than 3 carriers in peace time? Why we keep subsidizing Big farma if health care is private. Free education is exercise control over our government so we choose were to spend or taxes.
@@gus2603 The provision of "free" education and healthcare is a complex issue with various economic, political, and philosophical considerations. Public opinion on the matter can vary widely depending on a country's political and social context. Regarding the choice of where you can spend the stolen money through taxes, there are not many choices to make, leaving the word "choose" meaningless or sometimes deceiving when used by people above us. Just think about how much you can learn in the time that a student has to dress, commute, wait for the teacher and the time takes to get back to home. Not to mention the academic low-quality lessons.
I think there's a bit of strawman going on... or a joke, maybe(?)... hard to tell sometimes. 'Cause when people talk about "free" education rarely if ever do they assume by it that individuals who make the material or actually DO the teaching (the interactive part) aren't supposed to be compensated. What they mean is that whether or not you get an education and/or its quality shouldn't depend on the input conditions of the receiver. The way we think about "getting paid" is heavily biased by the current system.
I basically have no disagreement with any of this except one thing: It's not a recently invented mythology.... it is a mythology, but it's a mythology that's always been there.
I don't recall Richard Stallman (the godfather of the original Free Software movement "mythology") ever advocating for anything that sounded like the modern 'community-driven-development' phenomenon. His primary concern was always about preventing the tyranny of proprietary software, not giving specifics about how to build alternatives to proprietary systems, much less how to manage their communities.
What a limited view you have if you think of RMS as the godfather free software. He was just the new-wave of it, putting more restrictions on it. In the 50s and 60s the vast majority of software was free and open source. Usually under far more liberal licenses then the GPL. It wasn't until the 80s that closed licenses became the norm (mostly due to _Apple v. Franklin (1983)_ ), Stallman's work was specifically in response to _changes_ in norms. Of course this history lesson isn't consequential to what we're actually talking about, and that's that people have always been demanding of volunteers, not even just in software.
The point wasn't that RMS started open source, just that he's a well documented figure and an easy to verify example of "community driven development" simply not being a thing before. And your elaboration of its origins still didn't suggest that it was a thing before RMS either. Simply sharing punch cards doesn't resemble modern community driven development any more than file sharing on Napster did. It seems like GitHub's rise to popularity and its issue+PR request workflow is what enabled this "community-driven" mindset to take over in the first place. Because even the so-called "bazaar" model of Linux was still pretty selective about what contributions it accepted, nevermind "cathedral" projects like FreeBSD.
"Education should be free" "So you want all these people to work for free?!" such an american answer XD No, that means the government should care about having the strongest work force possible and help their population acieve that through grants and subsidy XD
Your basically inverting the extreme here. Everyone should be able to have access to education. but that doesn't preclude for profit education. The problem is that in an open market the best education will always be locked behind a pay wall, and in a non open market the materials are less likely to exist because there is no motive to produce it. Balance between Social / Commercial funding needs to be juggled. pure Socialism sucks as bad a pure capitalism.
Education should absolutely be free. Not in the sense that professors should not get paid but in the sense that they need to be paid from taxes. Because education is the best investment a state can do in their own population, that returns hundred-fold. Countries that lock education behind paywalls are hurting themselves in the long run.
A solid bug report with debug info, troubleshooting steps, etc… is often received very differently to the other extremes of “I need blah, do blah” or “please approve my change request”
Education should be free, the people creating the education courses should be paid by the collective people benefiting from that education, ie via taxes. Health care should be the same way, and if you don't agree, you're simply wrong. That's just how it is.
this is such an absurd statement education should not be free, nor should it be force to be paid for the amount of people that reach for the gov to solve things for them is insane
@@ThePrimeTimeagen The prerequisite would be a government that isn't full of children that can't handle money. This would never work in the US with the current government of course. It already works well elsewhere though. Gate keeping education behind money is bad for society though as one of he best ways to get out of poverty is education.
From a theoretical standpoint everything stated is correct. Now the tone is very much that of a rant, it's not a cold description of the issues. The first part is like when someone says "smiling is not part of my job". Then again I get the frustration but this is also reminiscent of acrid people when you are doing charity work that keep insulting and complaining about the people you are helping... The second part is way better.
That is not the definition of Open Source, and the article wasn't talking about forks. If people just made forks, there would literally be no problem here. The problem is that people feel like they're entitled to influence the main project instead of just creating a fork. Open Source only grants you the right to fork, not to have your changes get merged upstream.
You actually aren't (in the U.S.) unless you have a bachelor's degree. Many states require state-specific licenses to teach too. So you need an education to educate.
kinda weird to say "you're not entitled to contribute" when most (all?) open source licenses protect your right to change code or add your own code, so you are literally entitled to do that lol
contribute != modify just because you're granted the legal freedom to modify the code on your own fork, doesn't grant you the right to have your pull request accepted and merged into the main project
Here's my hot take: There is a mythology going around that states that people can put out products and consumers will not have any opinions or thoughts about how said product should work. The rant author is suffering from this. People don't have these thoughts because they spend money, they have them because they use products. Open Source isn't about the people who do the open sourcing, no matter how much they stamp their feet and whine that people have opinions about a project or how a project is run. Just keep the code to yourself if you don't want to hear what other people think.
This isn't about not listening, or not doing. Its about people who engage with opensource having Main Character syndrome. people get exceptionally shitty and make some wild demands. The reality of opensource is "you got something free" you can submit changes to the project if you like, if the project owner doesn't like your changes then you can fork. Your owed nothing.
This sounds like a child's take, calling Santa a meanie because they didn't like the present they got. Nobody thinks children lack opinions, adults just know their opinions also tend to lack perspective. The only reason you even have anything to complain about in the first place, is because somebody else decided to put it out there as a gift. If everyone took your stance, open source would effectively cease to exist, and you would have successfully played yourself. Working thanklessly like a slave to a mob's requests requires a real person's limited time and effort, and can take a serious toll in the long run. Simply being grateful on the other hand, costs nothing.
@@LambdaCalculator And? Who told the creator to put the thing out? The reason the open source license exists is to counter the negative effects of proprietary software on society. Not, to validate the ego of any one developer or developer community. The rant (in spite of the title.) isn't about the features of the license but about the features of dealing with people other than oneself. The way to solve that is to not make things public. People have the same sorts of interactions with closed sourced proprietary software. We don't need silly rants like this from supposed adults who decided to satisfy their own egos and then forgot that there are people other than themselves in existence.
Kind of surprised not many people pointed this out. If you do any kind of public work, you get public commentary. It's such a simple thing. Often people are not DEMANDING things, they are just looking to share their take because they care for the project. One can fork for sure, but being an asshole to users is a choice.
@@metachronicler You're missing the point. If you actually wanted to combat the effects of proprietary software, you'd find ways to make it sustainable to create/maintain said software. Advocating for developers to keep their source closed and justifying users that bite the hands that feed them, does literally the opposite of that. The only way your take makes sense is if you're against open source. The problem with your argument is that if a developer releases their code purely for the purpose of combating proprietary software, you're still encouraging others to give them shit for it regardless, making it less likely that they'd continue fighting proprietary software. If you actually cared about having free alternatives, you'd find ways to reduce the chances of having such projects fail. Even a for-profit business that receives money to put up with user bs is liable to discontinue products if their users complain. But you expect FOSS developers to maintain their products, put up with complaints, and do so without any form of compensation? Delusional. Besides, nobody's actually infringing on your right to complain, because that's not even possible anyway. If you want to be an emotional child and throw temper tantrums go right on ahead. The point is that you should expect consequences for doing so, and that those consequences negatively affect the open source ecosystem as a whole. Your last statement is also ironic, because it sounds like you're the one that has a hard time believing other people exist judging by the behavior you're trying to justify. If creators didn't think other people existed that might benefit from their work, they'd literally have no reason to release anything at all.
You are entitled to a fair review of code and an effort to review PRs that meet coding stabdards when there are open issues and solicitations for PRs. There are entirely too many repos where there are tons of PRs that are sitting idly by (or even worse a previous merge breaks the CI integration and nothing gets through. Thats not okay. There is entirely too much work that went into that PR to let it sit there because someone else broke something
Sorry but 99% of the time, just no. Many projects are one man shows with a single developer not even paid to maintain that piece of code. For such developer, it's a hobby, and it should remain as such, which means no string attached. The dev was simply nice enough to publish the project in case it might be useful to other people.
Open source is about me.
Aah you're right!
Open source is about @blu3_enjoy
always has been.
@blu3_enjoy thanks for being the open source.
Understandable, have a nice day
It’s so nice watching this man learn how to read in real time on live stream
I can't tell if you're joking. I think he said he's dyslexic.
Education should be free not free as beer but free as libre. The amount of censorship, geoblocking these days should be illegal!
yeah we should all work for free so you can get a good job? Its good to share, but commercial educational materials are also cool
It should be both. Publicly funded education works wonders. Student loan debt should not be a thing.
@@robertfletcher8964 it should be free to get educated. that doesn't mean educational material should be provided without compensation. it just means the funding should come from somewhere else. having an educated population increases productivity so the expenditure pays for itself in the long run
we should give free beer to kids
geoblocking pisses me off
You can't say that Prime is not a magician, and then watch how he summons a couple of experienced devs with his hat and sheer force of will. You just cannot.
1000% with Rich on this. I have several open source projects and I love LISP. There are a lot of "know it all" jerks in the open source world that demand other people do what they want. Not just users or corporate leeches. There are some maintainers/committers that are toxic jerks to everyone.
@Dredge22 That's pretty insane. If most people have a problem with him, shouldn't they vote to kick him out? I'd probably just leave the project, I don't have the patience for that sort of thing lol. Especially if I'm not getting paid
I think the classic example is systemd in Linux. It doesn’t matter whether systemd sucks or rules, the Linux community has been packed with people attacking the distributions that use it.
If you don’t like what Debian does, the only option that doesn’t make you a jerk is moving to something else.
It’s free software. The only classy option is to release your own distribution without it. I love Void, Guix, and Devuuan for doing that.
I'm just grateful prime is still out here in their primetime making prime content
There was a LOT of this kind of entitlement in minecraft modding. Like, I've seen people directly tell a mod author, "You don't own the mod. Ever since you uploaded it, it belongs to the community and you have a responsibility to maintain it!"
It's ridiculous.
Not code, but a few years ago I had released a font commercially and during the time I was working on it people were explicitly telling me I should release it for free and/or open-source because it wasn't originally my design even though I was the one putting in the effort to not only make it digitally (it was the first commercially available version of that design in nearly twenty years) but also expand it far beyond its original character set. I explicitly told them to kick rocks because if they wanted it free they should've done it themselves, then it would've been _their_ choice what to do with it instead of mine.
Open source software is amazing. It fucking cool that some developers take time out of their free time to develop free applications that in some cases are even better than the competition in my opinion.
For some creating a language is their life's work. That kind of dedication has to be appreciated. It has to be a labor of love since the odds of any traction is akin to winning the lottery given well entrenched incumbent languages.
17:49 instead of saying "any updates", I just fix all merge conflicts every week. one time it worked :)
0:23
That's a strawman. When people say education should be free, most of the time they don't mean people working in education should not be paid, but that they should be paid by the state, not their students. It's free in the student point of view, not in general. Same with healthcare. A lot of countries work like that.
Yeah that was a terrible take. Obviously if someone makes a course on SkillShare and tries to sell it doesn't need to be free. But primary, secondary and tertiary education should be free for all students.
You're strawman his strawman. This isn't the basic or essential education/ healthcare. This is extra learning, studies, and higher education. Just cause you want gold teeth doesn't mean you get em for free. You do get to learn to brush your teeth and how to floss. 😂
@@CheCortezTV I agree extra / alternative learning (meaning Udemy or SkillShare for example, as pointed out by Kordishal) doesn't have to be free, but I didn't see him specifying that, only education in general. Anyway, their cost is often absurdly low so I'm not sure why people would have a problem with that. I mean of course there is Twitter so it probably happens, but still lol
However higher education (meaning university) can absolutely be free.
That doesn't make the statement you are talking about a strawman. It makes the person saying these things' view of taxation and money in general a strawman. Things aren't free because they are paid for by someone else. And they aren't even free to you specifically if they are paid for by taxes. They are simply accessible, and the cost is defered or distributed or both.
But beyond that the only people who aren't entitled to education subsidy in the US (which often pays MORE than tuition) are people who 1) won't accept the type of education that is free to them (community college) 2) won't comply with the rules set forth by the people that issue the subsidies (academic standards) or 3) Can already afford to pay for this themselves.
@@Kordishal Should ALL primary, secondary, and tertiary education be free for ALL students? Or should there be reasonable options for people that meet reasonable minimum requirements? Because you can (and we do) already have this in most of the places where people say these sorts of things. We just do not provide completely unqualified access to infinite educational funds to arbitrarily unteachable/uncooperative students.
Glad that she asked about open source contributors seeking feedback. A lot of FOSS contributors coming from the outside really do have good intentions, they just may not be queued into dev social norms yet. I mentioned in another comment that my company maintains an open source library, so I do keep that in mind. Not everyone has access to a mentor, and that could be the next best thing.
To the gnulag you go
I want to say this to Arch users.
Rich has lots of great talks. I don't agree with 100% of what he says but what he says is still thought provoking.
Licensing and copyright/copyleft are where this starts to get super hairy. IANAL of course but I think that’s even more of the reason why this whole space needs to have more clarity because it’s so hard for your average dev to have any sense of what the hell is an appropriate licensing setup based on what people are using the tool for
Apache projects are also an interesting set of projects I’m curious about. There are so many tools they provide which are used so extensively and knowing where and when the line needs to be drawn from version to version. Specific changes to APIs vs security updates vs more broadly having families of tools that all interact with each other in meaningful manners is super appealing but theres also the large corporate interests in those projects that is always something that’s a question
This comes down to the continuing confusion about the difference between Free and Non-Free, Open and Non-Open software. ALL that the Open in Open Source means is that the copyright owner grants you a limited set of rights to SEE the source. ALL that the Free in Free Software means is that the copyright owner grants to u a limited set of rights to USE the source. (Yes there is overlap and they do sit on a spectrum!)
Prime immediately with the Libertarian take. „Education should be free“ does not mean we need an education Stasi that goes after people wanting to earn money with their educational stuff.
It means the government should probably pay for it because it and society at large have a major direct incentive in having the most educated citizens possible.
An educated citizen is more productive (in that you can have more high-skill industries which can demand higher prices), they are less likely to commit crimes and are probably just better citizens overall.
The annoying thing is that most of these things are not priced in to the more free market based system the US has. Every Milton enjoyer should understand that this is a problem.
Education has such an outsized positive effect on social cohesion, a states wealth, taxes even voting behavior that it is in a states best interest to provide it to the people for free at point of consumption and then finance it with future tax income.
So if someone makes high quality education material, they should not be forced to give it up for free but the state is heavily incentivized to pay this person to offer it for free or at a reduced cost,.
The FOSS community is some of the most helpful and yet the most annoying community. It's very hilarious if you're not the victim lol
My company inherited an open source library to maintain. We have a template that includes test suite run results and we don't accept the submission until that's run, and require new tests for new use cases. We accept that if it's something we need for our business, we'll get to it ourselves, so we can reject low-effort, short-sighted PRs.
@theprimetime you are a natural treasure! Appreciate your content and always appreciate your insight/humor
Open source is literally me
Open source is about US
*USSR ANTHEM PLAYS*
good one. I think there is another component to this too. Seems like the open source community gets bleed over from other developer communities. People come in with the same expectation that they had in other similar settings but perhaps they lack the awareness to notice they are not in those settings anymore.
yep, Evan Czapliki's recent strangeloop talk "The Economics of Programming Languages" covers this issue pretty well.
@@LambdaCalculator Nice I'll give it a watch. Thank you.
anyone got a link to that JS meme?
I really like that you brought in other developers for this video.
I totally agree with the article BUT...
If you are an open-source developer with a project that is depended upon by thousands or millions of people, then you are pretty much guaranteed to piss people off if you willfully ignore the community. I'm not saying you are obliged to implement the whims of the community, but don't be surprised if devs get outraged when one of their core dependencies does something insanely stupid. This is supposed to be when forks happen, but nobody really *likes* forks to happen, you know?
Imo, there are at its core two kinds of open source projects. Also, before somebody reads this, I am not sure I am good at explaining this (I am generally kinda bad at putting my thoughts about topics like this into words).
For one, there is the type of projects somebody throws into the open and manages it the way they want, they may engage with a possible existing community or not. I am going to call this type "pet project" here.
Then, there is the type of projects somebody starts but wants it to grow into "something more" (be it from the get go or change to that later on). The goal is to be widely used, have a community around it etc. I am going to call this type "community project" here.
Technically there are also the "Frankenstein projects" which advertise themselves as one of these two but act like the other. This often ends kinda toxic and bad for everyone involved and imo you should try to stay away from these, even if only for your own well being.
"Pet projects" have a few advantages:
- narrow vision
- clear responsibility (which can reach from "nothing" to things explicitly stated (e.g. a see from time to time projects which basically ignore everything besides CVEs))
- the owner can basically act however they want to (well, as long as it's not illegal)
but they also have disadvantages:
- it's harder to build a community around it
- it's hard to grow
- wide usage is not only accidental but can actively damage the project
- likelihood of many forks is high
"Community projects" have their own set of advantages:
- a community can share certain tasks, lessening the workload on a single individual
- since more people contribute to it, it can be more widely useful (basically everyone tries to adds stuff they care about)
- more diverse set of ideas and approaches to problem solving (after all, an engineer is likely to have a considerable different approach than artist)
but they also have disadvantages:
- they can quite a mess (e.g. who tries to keep the documentation up to date?)
- people can be quite the asses (after all, you DO advertise yourself open to other ideas, so why do you say no without explanation? or why do you ignore somebodies needs when your goal is for it to be as widely used a possible?)
- maintainership means that you pledge yourself to do stuff
So, when you go and do/create an open source project (or contribute to one), be explicit what kind it is and act accordingly. And if you are unsure what kind you want, go with "pet project" first, you can easily make it into a "community project" later on, but not so much the other way around.
An edited clip off the discussion on how to contribute to an open source project would be awesome to refer to people. :D
"Clojure never had a breaking change", if by that "syntactically" was meant, that's less impressive than it sounds with Clojure being an S-Expression language. If they mean the standard library, I guess it means they never significantly fix anything, only creating workarounds and alternatives, again less impressive than it sounds. Of course I could totally be wrong, and they just created the one single perfect future proof implementation of anything on the first release. Which sounds like magic. Or aliens. Or deliberately obtuse definition of "breaking change".
clojure is a lisp and lisp is nothing new, the clojure core lib is surprisingly small
I like that clojure doesn't break stuff like Scala or many open source projects. We all know popular OSS that break stuff and cause loads of grief. I've lost count of how many customers had spark stuff break because of Scala breaking changes.
The standard library can't be very large considering that they can use all of Java's. Which is rather large and have a lot of neat stuff in it.
@@HrHaakon So the breaking changes are also outsourced!
@@X_Baron
Java has very few breaking changes though, and the ones that it does have is announced years in advance, so it's pretty good about this stuff too.
But sort of, yes.
0:32 I doubt that most people who say this talk about (online) courses but instead they talk about general education.
5:00 what is this reference?
The phrase they say indicates the end of a transmission.
So if you used the word as part your message it could be construed as prematurely ended. Over.
@@Kane0123 thanks mate, I got that part. It seemed like they were quoting a skit and I was curious what it's from
@A.D.G they're quoting a movie called Airplane. Just youtube search Airplane movie over scene and you'll get it.
@@keelwakamar thank you
It's a meme. Look up "It's So Over / We're So Back"
Free is always about Free beer. A lot of people just pretend they don't receive the free beer and worse insisting on to get extra beer.
PHP seems like it isn't the language for me since there are breaking changes every update though I'm purposely using simplistic syntax and none of the new features... Clojure where have you been my entire career lol?!
Why not disable pull requests on your dotfiles if you dont want it
0:30 it applies to *_everything_* (at least every situation involving consenting parties)
If I see another tweet that has #RtR in it, "sent from my iPhone" I will fucking lose it; take accountability & buy from companies that offer features you want, or shut up.
If you want repairability, buy a repairable device. I like privacy, security, freedom, etc. so I use linux, if you want repairability you can buy a fairphone. (Or more realistically just buy a phone as repairable as you want based on your relative weighting on repairability as a feature compared to others) I am not going to demand Microsoft be forced to make what I personally want, because thats not a right I, or anyone else, has. If it's your problem, it's your problem to fix; If you genuinely can't then thats a conversation that can be had, but if you can buy a 1500 dollar phone you can buy a 500 dollar phone.
Terrible take. Literal hot dogshit take. There is this special little thing called "nuance" that just flew over your head, bud.
Open Source is about Tom. Tom is a genius.
That teej transition was solid
Look at me. I am the source now.
Im not sure your education example adds up. For that one, dont you think it might be a good idea fof governments to invest in making as much education as possible open to all, and use the tax payers money to compensate the author for a better society? Im nkt saying im against udemy or whatever. I just feel like you chose the absolute worst example, eduxation, and did a disservuce to your argument. Creative works might have been a better analogy.
Agreed, @Prime should expand since he has kids and he isn’t a dummy… maybe there is some wisdom here?
I think he's talking more about online courses and other things related to programming
@@eppi6328It still feels like he conflated the “everyone says” and the examples of “good quality courses”, at least personally I haven’t seen much of that compared to complaints about child education costs
Which does not make it free, since, as you wrote, it is compensated via taxpayers money.
@@kejtos5 free at the point of service is effectively free, not really worth the distinction.
Inventors of said technology should have the authority to make it free. But the USA was built on piracy and being wrong. Everything has a time limit to claim proprietorship.
Prime is such a great whistle wetter. I'm more than happy to support primetime by buying the drink.
There is nothing we can do
What is even controvertial about the article?
The petulant manchild energy the author gave off. It's incredible how he can say things that are largely true, and yet say it in the bitchiest way possible.
Reading the docs is for free, Andy!
Imagine if all that time and work that went into Linux and in the end it was packaged and wrapped with a price tag.
World would be a bit different for sure.
The more information available the faster society progresses.
But because of some very bad laws.
We have copyright that basically never ends when originally it was a max of 28 years.
Also yes education should be "free" wasn't that the idea of Libraries?
We should subsidize education in our country not put paywalls in front of it.
We wonder why our country is in the shape its in.
We should be sending the youth to the most high end educational structures.
We all pay taxes how about it go to something this rather than wars, or dead end research studies.
I am also not saying that we should just be entitled to "free" stuff either.
Back in the day they used to give schematics with hardware that was bought.
Even software came with extensive manuals and even source code.
Now we buy software with no information as to what it is even doing under the hood.
This is why they fight so hard against right to repair.
Our money don't go as far and we get less of a product that just collects our data and makes a profit of it.
Seems to me its not about good software when money is involved but more about the data they can collect from you.
Most software I use is opensource and I try to donate anytime I have the chance to such projects.
I try not to buy any software unless the source code is also included.
I can't stand the fact that companies and even some programmers I know think its OK to be able to buy software and not have the right to
the source code.
Imagine buying your car and you are not allowed to open the hood or do any work on it your self.
They say "you wouldn't copy a car if you could so why would you do it with software".
I say the hell I wouldn't.
If we could just copy and past our cars we all would do it.
We honestly just need to create a dialog and fix this as in the end it will benefit the country and the people that create this place.
Keep up the good work though.
Watch your videos quite a bit.
if you ever get a chance it would be amazing if you could do a video on David Beazley: Discovering Python - PyCon 2014 video here on UA-cam.
I know its a bit older but it was the video that made me begin to learn Python as I found it amazing.
Curious on how you and your viewers would have handled his problem with your languages of preference.
If at all.
God bless!
This is ILLEGAL, yol procrastinate in the save haven of having an actual JOB?!?! MAKE KIDS!! We need more N-S-A-gifts ...
Nice one, thx for sharing!
P.s.: @ThePrimeTimeagen - such a smooth sailing over the text, what's going on? Extra effort or was it the font that did you good?
Yup. Definitely guilty of being waaaaay too entitled considering that someone is offering their free time.
How else are you supposed to show off your portfolio, be "public source" about your projects while not allowing contributions? 😅
damn, less than a minute.. LET'S GO!
Good blog! What is p.s.? Post scrotum? What did Prime say?
"post scriptum", an anachronism from the time of long hand and, potentially, typewriters where going back and adding something you forgot wasn't as easy as when using a text editor.
Honestly I thought it was gonna be about open source contributions just for a resume line.
I don't like that he pretends that they don't benefit from maintaining open-source Clojure when it's clearly part of their marketing
**richard m stallman enters the chat**
PREWATCHED!
link in the description is to a fork, not original Rich's gist.
her name = hak5 product
Slash... ... ... .. .. .. . . . .
Most people arguing for free education are talking about free higher education, not commercial educational materials.
⚠️TRIGGER WARNING ⚠️
"Free," in this context, would mean taxpayer-funded. It's this strange phenomenon where humans organize and set aside a certain portion of resources for the betterment of the next generation, helping to disconnect children's educational outcomes from their parents' class and financial situation.
@Dredge22 regarding behavioral differences - show us your study, how much data you took in, etc.
Also show us how the outcomes are affected by people who worked hard to get those scholarships, because a lot of them are competitive and you have to work for them. TBH, sounds like anecdotes at best, and at worst a pure fabrication to support your world view.
I'm leaning towards the latter because I suspect people on earned scholarship are VASTLY different from people with rich parents. I'm pressing X to doubt.
@Dredge22 There are costs and benefits to funding higher education, just as there are costs to having an uneducated population unable to compete for jobs on a global stage. No issue you raised made taking the route unviable or demonstrated the approach would be statistically counterproductive, but instead, mostly revolves around a separate issue which sounds suspiciously similar to a culture war item.
@Dredge22
Your definition of hard work including payment is telling. It is of course completely not about labor but on a held belief that payments give people sense of responsibility. Being able to commit to a loan (or having parents support it) is definitely not equivalent "work" or "merit" than getting any kind of scholarship, including those you believe are not merit based (but will in fact depend on merit cause it's not like those scholarships dont have a limited number of slots for which people compete, even when reserved for certain communities).
Education should be free, not forcing people to give their work for free, but we should find a solution where, everyone can teach everyotherone their skills.
Knowledge exchange should be made easier.
Free as in we pay for it with our taxes!
People will thinks is the same bus is not for:
A: economy of scale
B: we can redirect or money from something else like do we need more than 3 carriers in peace time? Why we keep subsidizing Big farma if health care is private.
Free education is exercise control over our government so we choose were to spend or taxes.
@@gus2603
The provision of "free" education and healthcare is a complex issue with various economic, political, and philosophical considerations. Public opinion on the matter can vary widely depending on a country's political and social context.
Regarding the choice of where you can spend the stolen money through taxes, there are not many choices to make, leaving the word "choose" meaningless or sometimes deceiving when used by people above us.
Just think about how much you can learn in the time that a student has to dress, commute, wait for the teacher and the time takes to get back to home. Not to mention the academic low-quality lessons.
Helix > nvim, you can cope.
Bait used to be believable
Not sure how I write dotnet with these
that chick sounds like an hr rep
Totally agree. Not that there's anything wrong with that
I think there's a bit of strawman going on... or a joke, maybe(?)... hard to tell sometimes. 'Cause when people talk about "free" education rarely if ever do they assume by it that individuals who make the material or actually DO the teaching (the interactive part) aren't supposed to be compensated. What they mean is that whether or not you get an education and/or its quality shouldn't depend on the input conditions of the receiver. The way we think about "getting paid" is heavily biased by the current system.
I basically have no disagreement with any of this except one thing:
It's not a recently invented mythology.... it is a mythology, but it's a mythology that's always been there.
I don't recall Richard Stallman (the godfather of the original Free Software movement "mythology") ever advocating for anything that sounded like the modern 'community-driven-development' phenomenon. His primary concern was always about preventing the tyranny of proprietary software, not giving specifics about how to build alternatives to proprietary systems, much less how to manage their communities.
What a limited view you have if you think of RMS as the godfather free software.
He was just the new-wave of it, putting more restrictions on it. In the 50s and 60s the vast majority of software was free and open source. Usually under far more liberal licenses then the GPL.
It wasn't until the 80s that closed licenses became the norm (mostly due to _Apple v. Franklin (1983)_ ), Stallman's work was specifically in response to _changes_ in norms.
Of course this history lesson isn't consequential to what we're actually talking about, and that's that people have always been demanding of volunteers, not even just in software.
The point wasn't that RMS started open source, just that he's a well documented figure and an easy to verify example of "community driven development" simply not being a thing before. And your elaboration of its origins still didn't suggest that it was a thing before RMS either.
Simply sharing punch cards doesn't resemble modern community driven development any more than file sharing on Napster did. It seems like GitHub's rise to popularity and its issue+PR request workflow is what enabled this "community-driven" mindset to take over in the first place. Because even the so-called "bazaar" model of Linux was still pretty selective about what contributions it accepted, nevermind "cathedral" projects like FreeBSD.
its not about you, its about me. and me only.
i dont care what linus torvalds or whoever those no names say.
ME! AND ME ONLY!
"Education should be free" "So you want all these people to work for free?!" such an american answer XD No, that means the government should care about having the strongest work force possible and help their population acieve that through grants and subsidy XD
"through grants and subsidy" so not free. got it
Your basically inverting the extreme here. Everyone should be able to have access to education. but that doesn't preclude for profit education. The problem is that in an open market the best education will always be locked behind a pay wall, and in a non open market the materials are less likely to exist because there is no motive to produce it. Balance between Social / Commercial funding needs to be juggled. pure Socialism sucks as bad a pure capitalism.
@@squyrrel27 as free as walking down the sidewalk you fucking buffoon xD
Watch clojure made simple prime
My hot take: helix 🧬 >>>>>
dotfile pr'ing your streamer is a very special kind of parasocial
My wife (chat, you wouldn’t understand), to whom I am married (chat, you wouldn’t understand), who installs Arch Linux for me (chat, you . . .
Education should absolutely be free. Not in the sense that professors should not get paid but in the sense that they need to be paid from taxes. Because education is the best investment a state can do in their own population, that returns hundred-fold. Countries that lock education behind paywalls are hurting themselves in the long run.
i feel like entitled is overused here, does that mean i'm not allowed to open bugs or raise issues?
A solid bug report with debug info, troubleshooting steps, etc… is often received very differently to the other extremes of “I need blah, do blah” or “please approve my change request”
@@Kane0123 well, i only made one pr , and that was rejected (this was after talking to author who actually suggested making one)
@@emaayan People are gonna human, they are going to be jerks.
7:08 lol nobody cares how you feel xD we are developers we have no feelings, what is this lady on a about ? xD
Education should be free, the people creating the education courses should be paid by the collective people benefiting from that education, ie via taxes. Health care should be the same way, and if you don't agree, you're simply wrong. That's just how it is.
this is such an absurd statement
education should not be free, nor should it be force to be paid for
the amount of people that reach for the gov to solve things for them is insane
@@ThePrimeTimeagen The prerequisite would be a government that isn't full of children that can't handle money. This would never work in the US with the current government of course. It already works well elsewhere though. Gate keeping education behind money is bad for society though as one of he best ways to get out of poverty is education.
@@ThePrimeTimeagen Finally a streamer with common sense, based Primeagen
@@ThePrimeTimeagen "Education should only be accessible to those who can afford it." - You rn
From a theoretical standpoint everything stated is correct. Now the tone is very much that of a rant, it's not a cold description of the issues.
The first part is like when someone says "smiling is not part of my job". Then again I get the frustration but this is also reminiscent of acrid people when you are doing charity work that keep insulting and complaining about the people you are helping... The second part is way better.
make clojure content
Open Source is a License, it states there's no guarantee and you can use it as-is.
open source by definition is the entitlement to contribute. It's called a fork, and I suggest that these authors stop whining about their users.
That is not the definition of Open Source, and the article wasn't talking about forks. If people just made forks, there would literally be no problem here. The problem is that people feel like they're entitled to influence the main project instead of just creating a fork. Open Source only grants you the right to fork, not to have your changes get merged upstream.
@@LambdaCalculator ok. and?
Open source authors: I will release this as open source so I can have a lot of users.
Open source authors when they get a bunch of users: 😭😭😭😭🍼👶🍼👶🍼👶🍼👶
If you want education to be free, you're free to start teaching.
no no not like that
You actually aren't (in the U.S.) unless you have a bachelor's degree. Many states require state-specific licenses to teach too. So you need an education to educate.
@@biocular You can teach in the US without issuing degrees.
I want education to be paid for by my taxes
Missing the fucking point entirely!
weirdly hostile to everyone
kinda weird to say "you're not entitled to contribute" when most (all?) open source licenses protect your right to change code or add your own code, so you are literally entitled to do that lol
contribute != modify
just because you're granted the legal freedom to modify the code on your own fork, doesn't grant you the right to have your pull request accepted and merged into the main project
HOT TAKE:
Programming is Electrical Circuit Design if you look deep enough!
Change My Mind. ☕
:o
Here's my hot take: There is a mythology going around that states that people can put out products and consumers will not have any opinions or thoughts about how said product should work. The rant author is suffering from this. People don't have these thoughts because they spend money, they have them because they use products. Open Source isn't about the people who do the open sourcing, no matter how much they stamp their feet and whine that people have opinions about a project or how a project is run. Just keep the code to yourself if you don't want to hear what other people think.
This isn't about not listening, or not doing. Its about people who engage with opensource having Main Character syndrome. people get exceptionally shitty and make some wild demands. The reality of opensource is "you got something free" you can submit changes to the project if you like, if the project owner doesn't like your changes then you can fork.
Your owed nothing.
This sounds like a child's take, calling Santa a meanie because they didn't like the present they got. Nobody thinks children lack opinions, adults just know their opinions also tend to lack perspective.
The only reason you even have anything to complain about in the first place, is because somebody else decided to put it out there as a gift. If everyone took your stance, open source would effectively cease to exist, and you would have successfully played yourself. Working thanklessly like a slave to a mob's requests requires a real person's limited time and effort, and can take a serious toll in the long run. Simply being grateful on the other hand, costs nothing.
@@LambdaCalculator And? Who told the creator to put the thing out? The reason the open source license exists is to counter the negative effects of proprietary software on society. Not, to validate the ego of any one developer or developer community. The rant (in spite of the title.) isn't about the features of the license but about the features of dealing with people other than oneself. The way to solve that is to not make things public. People have the same sorts of interactions with closed sourced proprietary software.
We don't need silly rants like this from supposed adults who decided to satisfy their own egos and then forgot that there are people other than themselves in existence.
Kind of surprised not many people pointed this out. If you do any kind of public work, you get public commentary. It's such a simple thing. Often people are not DEMANDING things, they are just looking to share their take because they care for the project. One can fork for sure, but being an asshole to users is a choice.
@@metachronicler You're missing the point. If you actually wanted to combat the effects of proprietary software, you'd find ways to make it sustainable to create/maintain said software. Advocating for developers to keep their source closed and justifying users that bite the hands that feed them, does literally the opposite of that. The only way your take makes sense is if you're against open source.
The problem with your argument is that if a developer releases their code purely for the purpose of combating proprietary software, you're still encouraging others to give them shit for it regardless, making it less likely that they'd continue fighting proprietary software. If you actually cared about having free alternatives, you'd find ways to reduce the chances of having such projects fail.
Even a for-profit business that receives money to put up with user bs is liable to discontinue products if their users complain. But you expect FOSS developers to maintain their products, put up with complaints, and do so without any form of compensation? Delusional.
Besides, nobody's actually infringing on your right to complain, because that's not even possible anyway. If you want to be an emotional child and throw temper tantrums go right on ahead. The point is that you should expect consequences for doing so, and that those consequences negatively affect the open source ecosystem as a whole.
Your last statement is also ironic, because it sounds like you're the one that has a hard time believing other people exist judging by the behavior you're trying to justify. If creators didn't think other people existed that might benefit from their work, they'd literally have no reason to release anything at all.
You are entitled to a fair review of code and an effort to review PRs that meet coding stabdards when there are open issues and solicitations for PRs. There are entirely too many repos where there are tons of PRs that are sitting idly by (or even worse a previous merge breaks the CI integration and nothing gets through. Thats not okay. There is entirely too much work that went into that PR to let it sit there because someone else broke something
Sorry but 99% of the time, just no. Many projects are one man shows with a single developer not even paid to maintain that piece of code. For such developer, it's a hobby, and it should remain as such, which means no string attached. The dev was simply nice enough to publish the project in case it might be useful to other people.
I just found @bashbunni the other day! Love that she's here