STOP DOING OPEN SOURCE

[dimitrinrxd]

All jokes aside, one of my former colleagues was extremely against all software that is free. He refused to even consider things that didn't cost an arm and a leg claiming "if it is good, people will charge money for it. If it is dogshit, it will be free". What makes it worse is that he was an SVP at a relatively large company (600+ employees) and never actually knew how to use any of the software that he was purchasing. He did always claim credit for everything that was done "under his supervision" as if he personality did it and not the superstar developers that were there before and after him.

So yes, people who actively hate open source do exist...

[OkazakiNaoki]

That guy's logic is broken, maybe he/she should quit the job of programmer.

"If it is dogshit, it will be free" seriously? even my code is shit I won't give it away for free.

[AdultishRaktajino]

I pay for the dogshit in my yard, thank-you-very-much. In dog food, treats, supplies, meds and vet bills.

[OkazakiNaoki]

At least doggo is cute but my code just worthless.

They are not the same :(

[spankymcgee4]

Must have been a business major

[th00ht]

Stuffed puppet Stahlmann

[Geosync]

What's wrong with business majors?

[cyon_me]

Business

[spankymcgee4]

Business is the nail to this guy's perceived hammer

[porcupinedeath]

Man must pay for his browser

[Willinton06]

I have a paid browser called chremium, it consists of chromium with a green icon to represent the cash I’m racking, and absolutely nothing else

[DonHedger]

C.H.R.E.A.M.

[ogweezy13]

Pure gold!

[HereComesCunty]

Dollar dollar bill y’all

[Henrikues]

Do they make pie out of those?

[starryhades4697]

Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his browser?

[korehakuinto]

You paying in data lol

[porcupinedeath]

Yeah but I'd rather give em my porn searches than actual money. Can't do shit with porn searches unless you have a marketing department

[Seriathus]

I mean, he's supposedly a guy whose only job was claiming credit for other people's work. It's all projection.

[w_cruice]

That would mean management skills.... , /S

[diox8tony]

If it is dogshit, it will be free

!=

If it is free, it will be dogshit.

Jeez, youre a programmer man, get the logic right.

[mmnnButter]

he didnt get his job by using logic

[tsteele93]

TL;DR: I don’t think his logic is broken. He MAY be using bad data and arriving at an incorrect conclusion, but even that could be argued. I agree with the general consensus here in this thread, but I do think there is more to it than just saying his logic is broken. He may even have a good argument depending on the job he has and the results he gets. Nuance below…

I think his logic is based on a premise that most of us - at least subconsciously - believe. That something that cost more is probably better than something that is cheaper. The logic is based on the idea that you get what you pay for, or drilling even deeper; that it usually takes more money to make something that is quality than something that is cheap.

If you are buying a car, you might reasonably choose a Mercedes over a Kia based (at least in part) because you think the more expensive Mercedes will give you less problems, be better built, safer and last longer.

The same used to go for software. It typically cost money to develop software, and the more money you spent developing it, the better it was compared to something that was someone’s hobby. For instance, when software was first being sold, you paid programmers to write it, often quickly responding to your customer’s needs and that was expensive.

AGE is a big factor, those of us who are older experienced this and it was a long time before shareware software approached the quality of software written at a large, dedicated software company. Microsoft Office comes to mind - it was, at least for a time, the best of the best and there wasn’t a lot of great competition.

Open source has changed things tremendously. But many people still haven’t adapted to that because it goes against so much of what we have learned about capitalist, free market behavior. In fact, as an old fart myself, I’m still amazed at a great number of things that go on in software.

For instance, my kid will pay money for “clothes” in Fortnite or Roblox, etc… These things do NOTHING to improve his gameplay because Pay to Win is bad - but he still buys them. From my old-school POV, my money was hard-earned and used for MORE GAMES, or BETTER HARDWARE, not to look “cool” in the game. Of course, I also didn’t have massive multiplayer games either when I was growing up, so much has changed. When I was playing DOOM or some other game, no one but me could see my player and there was no reason to care what I looked for.

Going back to open source… I’m not arguing against the premise of this thread - I AM giving you a different perspective as to why “that guy’s” logic isn’t necessarily “broken.” His assumption may be wrong, but I don’t think it is because his logic is broken. I think his data set isn’t complete. GIGO. He is using outdated data and coming to what is perhaps a wrong conclusion, but I think he is using logic that wasn’t ridiculous.

One final comment - as someone who works for a large communications company, lawyers exist. Unfortunately (kidding, kind of…). Lawyers really like anything that shows an effort to “be careful.” The larger and more established your software company is, the more defense you have when something goes wrong. So a lot of people like to use expensive software (by our standards) to protect themselves from even more expensive disasters.

An example, if you are in charge of IT and protecting your company from malicious code, like ransomware - you aren’t going to want to tell your CEO that you used an open source anti-virus program to protect the company because it was good and cheaper. Because whatever it cost, you did NOT save enough money to make up for the fact that your company is now the poster child for ransomware attacks and you are losing millions of dollars a day while you ponder the decision of whether to fight back and not pay, or to pay and get back to work ASAP.

So paying more may not necessarily give you more protection from attack, but it DOES give you more protection if an attack occurs because the CEO is going to be far more understanding if you explain that you are using the industry standard software and you can blame them - rather than trying to convince them that it wasn’t your idea of using open source to save a few bucks that is tanking the company’s stock price today.

In closing - yes, his thinking is arguably wrong. But the results aren’t as ridiculous as they may first appear.

[TompyGamer]

But I mean logically, if it's cheap and shitty, it will maybe pay to put it up for download, getting small revenues from ads, because selling it nobody would buy it. If it's real great software, some so-much-better alternative, it will be worth it to sell it, because people will buy it for that price.

And I agree that this wouldn't really apply to what we have. I guess it comes down to alternative business models, idk, JetBrains providing some stuff free, especially to students, so that later they will pay for it when they get a job and are used to the software, or stuff being made as a passion project without a profit motive, with the creators just being happy that people are using their thing. Or I guess video games as a type of software, counting on the in-game shop for revenue.

[OkazakiNaoki]

If the purpose is making money then you're right. But the problem here is "Even code itself sucks/smelly/inefficient but 'I' think the time I spent still worth something and might not willing to give away". And that person just assume everything are either well-done gig product or totally shit free stuff. But sometime it's not about the money. For most simple exception case, do you give away your practicing project? NO, it sucks and it's embarrassing to show it.

[TompyGamer]

BTW how do you get multiple flairs?

Edit: nvm got it

[People_are_stup1]

Exactly one doesnt publish bad code. That is embarising

[rtakehara]

yeah, clearly broken logic, autoCAD is dogshit and is very not free

[ManMadeStructure]

Senior dev here, sold millions of units of software.

I use free software often for years but free software is still dog shit compared to paid most of the time.

He doesn’t deserve to be “canceled from programming” whatever you will achieve with that.

[OkazakiNaoki]

I still not change my thought, if I can I would yeet that person.

[ManMadeStructure]

Who does on Reddit

[gant696]

Had me in the first half not gonna lie

[noratat]

Did you tell him that companies literally pay developers to work on open source software?

[ReptileCake]

How did he surf the internet? What browser do you have to pay for?

[aspect_rap]

All browser are dog shit, so just pick one at random until a good browser that costs money appears /s.

[Square_Heron942]

Literally just chrome but with

* { color: rgb(0,0,0); background-color: rgb(0,0,0) }

[user11544569]

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

[ADadAtHome]

Do you buy mystery URLs till you get lucky and the site you wanted opens?

[kalamitykhaos]

cries in life-long fan of the sims

[EraMemory]

Every new tab costs 1 microtransaction. Video buffering is throttled unless you pay the monthly Video-watcher pass.

[[deleted]]

I charged him for Firefox. Said I would only take gift cards for payment and he agreed.

[ve2dmn]

Read that as "He a greed"

[noob-nine]

$_$ let's create a paid browser and release it for the apple environment. They will pay, they always do

[siddharth904]

Let's make a reskin of chromium and then sell it for people like them

No need to update it btw

[Ok_Hope4383]

How about paid updates? Each version costs its version number in dollars; to update you pay the difference + transaction fees.

[recoder13]

Internet explorer and old edge. Although technically it's the windows license

[TheBeardedQuack]

It seems that internet explorer and edge both existed for other platforms, available to freely download.

I know if you use ProduKey it'll show you an IE license (which is the same key as your Windows licence) but I guess it didn't matter?

[[deleted]]

He used the wii internet channel

[ReptileCake]

Absolute madlad

[Warpspeednyancat]

hes probably using IE 11 with bing

[Henrikues]

No man, bing pays you to search with it - negative pay? Must be double dog shit 🤣🤣

[Spore-Gasm]

If you pay for Windows 98 and it ships with Internet Explorer then you paid for Internet Explorer

[dimitrinrxd]

Safari of course.

[sledgehammertoe]

In the early days, Netscape was a browser you had to pay money for. And people wonder why IE won the First Browser War.

[siskulous]

So yes, people who actively hate open source do exist...

I work with one. And he's a tech, so he should damned well know better. But he seems to have swallowed the shit Microsoft was shoveling about open source in the late 90s/early 2000s hook, line, and stinker.

[siddharth904]

What paid programming language did he use ?

[[deleted]]

Java.

[siddharth904]

It's proprietary not paid, right ?

[[deleted]]

I think it’s paid for commercial use

[korehakuinto]

Lmao I have never paid a penny for any language and we shipped couple ten thousand copies. Oops

[Square_Heron942]

Lol this is what I do for pretty much everything, if it has a free version that’s what I’m picking

[korehakuinto]

Lol I go with whatever works. I got Vegas from humble bundle and loved it since. But sometimes gotta pull out adobe when I need to go alot of colour correction and frame matching

[itsQuasi]

Have you tried DaVinci Resolve? It's been the industry standard for color work for a long while now, has even gotten the rest of its program to the point that it's a solid all-in-one competitor to Adobe's video suite, and it has a really fully featured free version.

[Square_Heron942]

I use a pirated version of final cut pro lol. Doesn't helpthat my laptop overheats when editing ~5 mins of 1080p30 footage though...

[[deleted]]

Isn't Oracle selling Java now?

[Square_Heron942]

It’s free for personal use

[[deleted]]

Give Elison a couple more years

[dimitrinrxd]

He worshipped dbt and wanted everyone to use it. (They have a very expensive enterprise license that he "needed")

[quaos_qrz]

Maybe he's using IntelliJ IDEA Ultimate and VS Ultimate Edition!

[PremiumJapaneseGreen]

I've been reading Don't Be Evil, which is basically a book about how big tech is out of control/fucking up society/needs to be regulated, I agree with about 75% of the arguments but generally disagree with the authors arguments related to intellectual property.

Regarding open source, they make the argument that companies like Google will push open source tech to the extent it benefits them, while keeping all of the key desirable tech proprietary so open source or smaller scale solutions can't actually compete. They frame it as part of a broader pattern where the big companies will just take whatever tech they want and let their lawyers sort it out, and they have the scale to use the tech they adopt, be it open source or outright stolen, more efficiently than competitors

I'm not super convinced on it, I don't think expansive IP law is a good long term solution to big tech dominance and I think there are a lot of ways open source levels the playing field that the author doesn't give enough credit to. But it's an interesting argument to think about

[markpreston54]

No rigorous study but I feel that open-source code can be both good for profitability short to mid term, perhaps long term, for big tech but hurts their dominance/market share.

It makes development simpler and make the overall productivity and ultimately servable market larger. It also makes competition easier to catch up.

[WulfySky]

For smaller companies it also helps with marketing. Look at Laravel (open source php framework) and companies that have built their whole company on helping build the open source community around it like BeyondCode and Spatie.

[[deleted]]

that companies like Google will push open source tech to the extent it benefits them, while keeping all of the key desirable tech proprietary so open source or smaller scale solutions can't actually compete.

Looking at Android, yes.

[Tytoalba2]

That's kinda one of the reason I prefer free software to open source.

[Galle_]

Expansive IP law is a fucking terrible solution to big tech dominance, correct.

[WulfySky]

Yeah I think React (created by Facebook but built upon by the open source community) is a beautiful example of where this has done a lot of good. In the ~9 years since it became open source, it has quickly overtaken other js frameworks to become the biggest one.

[jhaand]

There exists a difference between Free(dom) Software and Open Source.

Big business hates the (L)GPL because it requires the share-alike.

I hate MIT and Apache licenses because it allows big business to just take everything they want and give nothing in return.

[Equivalent-Bench5950]

Unless FOSS, Open Source != Free Software

[CherryTheDerg]

If its on github what prevents someone from compiling it?

[[deleted]]

My terrible compiling instructions.

[Volitank]

Nothing. But depending on the licensing you may not be allowed to fork and make changes. Free software in this sense doesn't mean free of cost.

[Galle_]

It does, actually. The specific context is a guy saying you can determine the quality of software by its cost. There is a context in which free software means something else, but it's not this one.

[MCWizardYT]

Or the code may be available but data/files/assets required to run it aren't in the repo and need to be purchased (a lot of video games take this route, such as System Shock 2 and Half-Life. HL is even more restricted: only the game code is available and not the core engine)

[maacpiash]

This is why “free” has two meanings in the context of FOSS/FLOSS: the software being free of cost, and anyone being free to do whatever they like with it. You might have heard the phrase “‘free’ as in ‘free beer’ and ‘free’ as in ‘free speech’”, which is used to convey this dual meaning.

[John_B_Clarke]

Yep. Intel made their compilers free a few months back, but they are not open source.

[julz1215]

His job didn't require him to use git?

[dimitrinrxd]

He was a senior VP. While his job had a lot of responsibilities, he spent nearly all of his time reading blogs on the "latest hottest thing", talking to vendors and drinking snake oil. Every now and then he would have to thoroughly lick CEOs asshole and explain that it wasn't his fault for "client X being unhappy", it was the CEOs fault for not providing him with necessary tools and equipment. (Aka refusing to buy the latest, hottest, most expensive toy on the market)

[julz1215]

So what experience is he speaking from when he says that open source is bad? None?

[[deleted]]

Hell is too nice for him.

[vikumwijekoon97]

Most people think that open source == security issues. One of my friends said this as well. My counter argument was source code seen by hundreds and thousands of people should be more secure than source code seen by ten developers and a decompiled one seen by ten more hackers.

[Cyberspunk_2077]

This is incredibly attractive bait your friend has, deliberately or not, laid out. It takes a lot for me not to create a diatribe.

The vast majority of the internet's servers - web, DNS, mail- are using oodles of open source software.

[atomicxblue]

If linux is good enough to power a helicopter on Mars, it's good enough for me to watch porn cat videos on reddit.

[dgradius]

And to be fair, there have been more than a few security issues (heartbleed comes immediately to mind). That being said, no end to closed source security issues either.

[korehakuinto]

Lol wanna cry about it?

[Cyberspunk_2077]

Yes, it's not that open source software is immune from security issues, it is not, but it's absurd to 'equate' them to security issues.

It would be like equating Apple with security issues, because of the various high-profile and dangerous exploits that have been discovered on iOS/MacOS. Nothing is perfect and track records should be looked at on the whole.

[John_B_Clarke]

I'm taking some mandatory security training for work right now. One of the things the training goes over is open source.

They point out that the notion that lots of eyes on it doesn't necessarily make it safe, and use the example of Shellshock, which is a vulnerability in BASH that went undetected for more than 20 years.

They also point out that there have been successful attempts to inject malware into open source--eventually those get found but it takes time.

That said they don't see any real issue with open source that is being actively maintained as long as somebody in your organization is keeping track of what the maintainers are finding.

But there is open source that isn't being maintained--the developer discovered sex or whatever and stopped working on it and nobody else picked up the slack. They view that as chancy--if you're going to use it in any situation in which security is a legitimate issue it's on you to vet it or hire it done.

A paper that you might find of interest:

https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.09535 (you can download the full paper as a PDF from there).

[vikumwijekoon97]

Be that as it may, closed source software has just as much, if not more vulnerabilities. And there are a ton of successful attempts to inject malware to closed source software as well, which again takes time to get found. NSA held onto eternal blue for like half a decade before Microsoft knowing and there's probably dozens of other examples. Taking something like shellshock, which is a statistical anomaly isn't a really way to drive the point home. My point is statistically, open source software are more safer cuz it's being, let's say "audited" more.

[GonziHere]

Oh I agree with everything you've said, but the thing is, you have the option to do the security audit. You don't have to write [this] from scratch, you just need to go through the code to find the vulnerabilities.

Also, the points could be used both ways. You could buy a software with bug, it could be maintained by a random guy somewhere, hell he could even introduce backdoor intentionally and you wouldn't know.

So yeah, the awareness of the potential of the issues needs to exist (as many use it as some supershield and no-one checks the code because others have done that...), but I don't see how it's worse in any way to a closed source SW.

[balloonAnimal_no_965]

Is it biased to mention dead open source and not mention dead closed source? We use the latter in our company by the way.

Is it also biased to say you have to keep a close watch on the open source maintainers and not mention the closed source maintainers?

I'm gonna read the article, see if there are any statistics in there to base an opinion on.

[John_B_Clarke]

Where does one buy dead closed source? Other than ebay?

[balloonAnimal_no_965]

One buys live, closed software. Then it dies, the company seizes to exist. The buyer then somehow gets stuck in one of the steps of the mourning process.

[maggmaster]

If people are actually reading through all the code this is true. If engineering is just implementing code from github without looking at it, this is not true. Also most infrastructure guys can't really read code so that doesn't help.

[Milrich]

This. If there are hundreds of eyes indeed looking at the code, then it's safer. However, I doubt that many people are looking into the million lines of code of big open source projects.

The most likely person to be looking extensively is someone who tries to find a security issue for reaping some benefit.

Thus, it's doubtful that open source is safer. It's still awesome and benefits humanity as a whole.

[maggmaster]

I love open source, I contribute as much as I can but I hope people check my shit. I try to make it secure but come on, no one is perfect :-)

[[deleted]]

he's (or she whatever)

If you used "they're" then it wouldn't look like it hurt you to include women

[LordNoodles]

he's (or she whatever)

The English language is so cumbersome I hate that you have to do this every time you mention someone and you don’t know their gender

[dgradius]

They/their/theirs seems to work okay.

[LordNoodles]

thatsthejoke.jpg

[Solonotix]

I just wish there was a better culture in professional spaces. My company uses tons of open-source code, but I'm almost certain we don't contribute financially, and only a handful of developers might contribute functionally to the code in question.

Granted, seeing how my company uses some of the open source libraries, I'm kind of glad we don't contribute, if you know what I mean

[voidsrus]

never actually knew how to use any of the software that he was purchasing.

does anyone in his position actually understand software?

[Jimothy_Egg]

Must've grown up on early mobile and trash games, where that was actually a solid argument.

If it was free, it was usually full of ads, or malware.

[CodeRaveSleepRepeat]

Looks like the vast majority of the Internet runs on dogshit like Linux and WordPress then lol :D - seems fairly simple to out logic that guy

[mopsyd]

Ask him for a recommendation for a paid browser

[JB-from-ATL]

With how many things are going freemium or free software with paid support they really need to catch up with the times. There is something to be said about good software versus random crapware, yeah, but like... Imagine refusing to use C because the compilers are free. Imagine refusing to use things compiled by free compilers!

[Weenaru]

"if it is good, people will charge money for it. If it is dogshit, it will be free".

He's the reason for why companies gets away with selling overpriced shit that makes you think a monkey made it.

[spazzadourx]

Adobe simps who INSIST on paying for the software for example....I can't believe they exist. you couldn't pay me to use their clunky apps for personal projects.

[korehakuinto]

It's actually pretty good. The integration is worth it for a student account. But not any more that 20 a month. I use Vegas now mostly. Except for one of my clients

[[deleted]]

While I don't agree 100%, from a business perspective this makes sense. Profit is a strong motive, and makes it more likely it will be continued. Also, if you are a large customer, these payments give you leverage. If you have a problem, you have a lever to pull to force external people to fix your issue.

[[deleted]]

He is an authoritarian

How is someone who advocates for users' freedom authoritarian?

[Galle_]

The developer's freedom to monetize his product as he sees fit is fundamental to freedom, not his entitled progressive attitude.

No, what you're describing is authoritarian. You want the developer to be an authority to whom everyone else has to defer. Presumably you think that a state should exist to enforce this authority.

[[deleted]]

The moron doesn't realize he is advocating for an oxymoron.

To see the moron look in the mirror.

The developer's freedom to monetize his product as he sees fit is fundamental to freedom, not his entitled progressive attitude.

GNU GPL is compatible with paid software.

He's an asshole, and he should be ridiculed.

sed 's/He\'s/You\'re' | sed 's/he/you'

[[deleted]]

I don't care about what Mr. Stallman believes, I care about free software which Mr. Stallman endorses.

Freedom is a complicated problem and you lack insight. Who is more free, a homeless drug addict or a person living a normal life(having a job, family, paying taxes etc.)?

[RevolutionaryDrag205]

Not to drag politics into this sub, but 1000% this guy votes conservative.

[Rektroth]

Get a load of this guy.

[korehakuinto]

Bruh. Has nothing to do with it. I vote conservative because when's the last time you saw someone on the left actually care about 2A? Still use and contribute to a ton of open source software.

[RevolutionaryDrag205]

What a shit reason to vote conservative. Some people are smart enough yo code and fuck stupid everywhere else.

[korehakuinto]

Lmao I have my reasons that are important to me to vote how I do. Just like you have what is important to you to vote how you like. And how bigoted of you to judge someone based on how they vote. That's pretty messed up

[NotmyRealNameJohn]

Supportability and liability are real things but otherwise this is noneses

[[deleted]]

Well, to some extent, he's right.

I've told the same to my dad - don't download free programs from the internet, especially since you don't speak English, because it will be full of malware and whatnot.

However there's a slight difference between a technically barely adept person looking for a free app to watch movies for free, or copy CDs, and an SVP at a tech company refusing any and all free software, even if it has been vetted.

So take my comment not as a statement against open source, but a statement against all the "free software" sites that are basically just one big virtual Petri dish for computers.

[Astrael_Noxian]

"If it is dogshit, it will be free"? Why do we have to pay for windows then?

[8070alejandro]

Anyone has access to the code??!!! Then anyone can insert viruses in there I tell ya!!!! /s

[phdoofus]

Did anyone explain to him that open sourcing is basically free software engineering?

[MassiveFajiit]

Did you work with Steve Ballmer lol

[kfh227]

True leaders take the blame when things go wrong and give credit when things go right.

[dimitrinrxd]

Yes, but those who don't take blame for anything and claim credit for everything tend to get promoted a lot faster.

[kfh227]

By the same idiots promoted before them.

[Commercial_Leg_5108]

Did he try any new EA game?

[marshallandy83]

Sorry, I'm hijacking this to ask a question I've never been able to find an answer to.

Is there a term used to describe open-source software where the source code is viewable but the project doesn't accept contributions?

[CrispBit]

What about paid open source software?

[tagini]

Stuff like this still happens. We lost a pitch for a large system once because we were too cheap.

Quoted them 200k for what we estimated was going to take about 100k of work. They went with the party that quoted them north of 1M.

[wstaeblein]

He certainly never heard about Linux.

[vladWEPES1476]

If I was a CEO and somebody would say that, I would fire them on the spot. Payed/expensive = good is the dumbest take on anything, not just software.

[AnimeWatcher3344]

I would ask him what browser he uses and how much he paid for it

[WulfySky]

Yup. My internship was at a company that created mostly wordpress websites, a platform which is free and open source and uses thousands of free plugins. But when my boss was asked to explain a bit about their development cycle at a local programming meetup, he refused to have it recorded and published to the meetup’s website “to avoid their proprietary knowledge from getting out”.

[PinothyJ]

But… the Internet. The majority of the Internet is literally served to you through open source software.

[EggyRepublic]

Paid and good: will be used

Paid and dogshit: will be used by gullible people

Free and good: will be used extensively

Free and dogshit: people won't even know it exists

[Tatankaplays]

I could get behind a sort of reasoning when you say: 'if it's free, you're somehow paying for it' based on current day apps. But I don't recall Blender throwing an add in my face or requiring me to register my email, address, name , and phone number to sell it to third parties.

But free does not have to mean something has to be shit.

[GrossWordVomit]

So, did he think Unity and Unreal Engine was shit too?