New blog post: 'Corporate paratisism is the problem, not software freedom, is the solution': is still down for the time being, so I've posted this piece on my Friendica account for now.

"While it may seem that such an contribution model that depends on just a few core contributors for so much of the code wouldn’t be sustainable, the opposite is true. Each vendor can take particular interest in just a few projects, committing code to those, while 'free riding' on other projects for which it derives less strategic value."


This is another reason why the 'source available' folks are wrong. "Cloud" vendors may not be paying directly to use their software, but they pay people whose work days contribute huge amounts to a wide range of projects. Projects like the Linux kernel, without which 'source available' projects like , , and , wouldn't have a viable business in the first place.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon - NZOSS

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!