Re: Why open source?

[Vern Hamberg <vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Nathan

As to giving away open source - I think the presentation addressed that 
to a degree - Dan Pink mentioned that those who do things like open 
source, they have jobs, as well. And they use their own time for what 
does not get them monetary reward.

Now if your job is to write software, it's important to get paid for 
that - sorry for the piercing glance at the obvious. Then you might go 
write something just for the fun of it, just because you can, just 
because it gives you satisfaction. You probably won't get paid for that. 
But it's not your job, after all.

I think that's a bit of reconciliation, eh?

Vern

On 6/3/2010 4:48 PM, Nathan Andelin wrote:
> > From: Aaron Bartell
> > Awhile back we had discussion about why in the heck someone would
> > want to give away source without much, if any, monetary or business
> > return.
> >      
> I could relate to the video, too.  Individuals pursuing activities that require thinking, and especially creativity, need and value autonomy and self-direction.  And we're willing to sacrifice money, for it.
>
> But individual ownership is a big motivator, too; reaping from that which you sew; which may not mesh with your ideas about open-source.  How would you reconcile that?
>
> BTW, I appreciated your comment on Steve Wills blog, as well as other places, promoting the idea of micro-partitioning IBM i servers in small enough slices, that individual programmers might afford autonomy, self-direction, and individual ownership of work product.  Too many IBM i programmers are stuck with working only on employer's servers, where the employer controls the manner and means, so to speak.
>
> -Nathan.
>
>
>
>
>