I’m unbiased towards the subject. I’m genuinely curious about how long-term FOSS ideology would work.

I’m using FOSS but I’d still consider myself a casual user. It seems like most FOSS I’ve seen is a free, buggy, alternative to mainstream software, which resolves a problem the user had.

From my perspective, (and do correct me if I’m wrong) FOSS doesnt seem sustainable. Everyone can contribute, but how do they make a living? My guess is they do other things for income. And what about the few contributors who do 90% of the work?

What if every software became FOSS? Who would put in the free labor to write the software to print a page, or show an image on screen, or create something more complex like a machine learning advanced AI software?

Would it simply be that everyone provides for each other? Everyone pitches in? What about people who have bills to pay? Would their bills be covered?

This concludes my right-before-bed psychology inquiry.

  • sturlabragason@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I suspect the OP is trolling or phishing for material for his own post or essay. Why else would you post such questions in an open-source community? :D

    “FOSS doesn’t seem sustainable. Everyone can contribute, but how do they make a living?”

    Your concerns about the sustainability of FOSS suggest that most contributors must be sidelining it for other income. However, major corporations have built their entire business models on supporting open-source software. Companies like Red Hat are testament to the economic viability of FOSS. Additionally, large tech firms like Google and IBM heavily invest in open-source, further ensuring its sustainability.

    “It seems like most FOSS I’ve seen is a free, buggy, alternative to mainstream software.”

    You label FOSS as a ‘buggy alternative,’ but it’s crucial to recognize that the vast majority of software around the world relies on open-source modules, functions, and frameworks. This isn’t a coincidence; it’s a result of rigorous maintenance and improvement by a global community of developers. Open source doesn’t just run ‘some’ of the internet; it’s the backbone of almost all modern digital infrastructure.

    “What if every software became FOSS? Who would put in the free labor?”

    Wondering who will contribute the labor misses the point that contributions to FOSS are often mutually beneficial. Developers gain career benefits, improve their skills, and sometimes even receive direct compensation. It’s not ‘free labor’; it’s a collaborative economy of shared resources and mutual benefits.

    “Would it simply be that everyone provides for each other? Everyone pitches in? What about people who have bills to pay?”

    Finally, your concern about financial sustainability in a FOSS world seems to overlook the multiple ways people monetize their contributions, either directly or indirectly. Besides, the value of open-source contributions isn’t merely monetary; it includes invaluable intangible benefits like skill development, community building, and personal freedom.

    The questions you’re posing have been practically answered by the existing and thriving open-source ecosystem. It’s not just an idealistic notion; it’s a proven, sustainable, and indispensable aspect of the global software landscape.

    • oo1@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree this looks trolly. but to add

      FOSS also has benefits to b2b customers ,
      It gives them supply chain indepence / resilience avoids “vendor lock in” or a million ways to say it…

      It’s a similar benefit to using standardised physical parts in place of something bespoke.

      Even if i’m paying a large tech company for a service, i’d want them using and developing foss so that i can theoretically switch supplier more easily. sure ther’s probably some proprietary data, but not necessarily propritary code/software tools.

      Of course some b2b cusomers seem to really enjoy paying MS and oracle etc. to bend them over a barrel. . .