• TrumpetX@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    This wouldn’t work for a few reasons, but the most glaring is that it would incentive re inventing the wheel.

    • haui@lemmy.giftedmc.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Which is exactly my idea. The AGPL is A LOT worse in this regard since it prevents them from going closed source in the first place iirc. I think many small businesses would gladly use the software and pay 1% of their revenue.

      This kind of argument imo is circular because if I build your house for free, you will not build it yourself, plain and simple. If I provide a service, I ought to get paid for it, plain and simple. And if you make money off of my work, you are part of the problem if you dont donate anyway. So making it mandatory imo is absolutely no issue.

      • TrumpetX@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Reinventing the wheel is exactly why we should use open source libraries.

        Expanding on other unintended outcome here: Different projects have different values. This takes no account for something like Spring vs Apache Commons IO. Or Rails vs nokogiri.

        Libraries will be incentivized into breaking apart to maximize revenue.

        This isn’t really unlike the unintended consequences of health insurance and how it leads to overpriced services with lots of indecipherable codes for service.

        It’s about how the system rewards (pays) for the service. I’m all for supporting open source, but the proposals in this thread are disturbingly anti open source.