←back to thread

295 points todsacerdoti | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.195s | source
Show context
ef2k ◴[] No.45949896[source]
> I’m still trying to figure out what kinds of open source are worth writing in this new era

Is there any upside to opensourcing anything anymore? Anything published today becomes training data for the next model, with no attribution to the original work.

If the goal is to experiment, share ideas, or let others learn from the work, maybe the better default now is "source available", instead of FOSS in the classic sense. It gives people visibility while setting clearer boundaries on how the work can be used.

I learned most of what I know thanks to FOSS projects so I'm still on the fence on this.

replies(6): >>45949925 #>>45950185 #>>45950283 #>>45950928 #>>45951508 #>>45953096 #
llbbdd ◴[] No.45950928[source]
I keep seeing this attitude and I don't really understand it at all; there's no upside to publishing open source work because it might be utilized by more people, is that correct?

Or is it the attribution? There are many many libraries I have used and continue to use and I don't know the author's internet handle or Christian name. Does that matter? Why?

I have written a lot of code that my name is no longer attached to. I don't care and I don't know why anyone does. If it were valuable I would have made more money off of it in the first place, and I don't have the ego to just care that people know it's my code either.

I want the things I do today to have an upside for people in the future. If that means I write code that gets incorporated into a model that people use to build things N number of years from now, that's great. That's awesome. Why the hell is that apparently so demotivating to some people?

replies(4): >>45951096 #>>45952331 #>>45955819 #>>45957327 #
1. ◴[] No.45951096[source]