Yeah, that's immediately what my mind went to. If my code was used by someone as major as Nintendo, then I wouldn't be making a fuss. But you can bet that I would have 50 different ways to move that into a discussion during a job interview.
Yeah, sure it would be nice if people sent me free things because they're using my code. However, putting restrictions on my code or making a huge stink about it on social media sounds like a good way for people to not use my code.
If I wanted something back for sure in exchange for my code, then I would license it such that I'm going to get something back or setup some other contract. I thought that's how adulthood worked. If you want something in exchange for your work then you need to set it up ahead of time. If you want to give somebody something then you shouldn't expect anything back. You gave it.
Great point. In the current market for devs, the expected value of that is probably worth ~$10,000's+.
A switch is ultimately a mid spec Androidish tablet. I'd imagine embedded system manufacturers would really value him
https://github.com/feross/safe-buffer/blob/master/index.js
It’s a tiny API wrapper in JavaScript for older Node versions. While useful for someone on older Node, it doesn’t really say anything about the author’s embedded system chops.
This should have been mentioned in the original post as it gives some much-needed perspective about the scale of the contribution.
There's plenty of personal gain to be found being an OSS developer (especially in a group setting just outletting creatively with other talented people) without directly making the motivation prizes/money the end goal.
No one is against rewarding OSS developers as much as possible. I'm certainly not and think every successful company using OSS software, aka all of them, should have a wing donating to projects. But I am against watering it all down to some narrative of OSS developers somehow being exploited by commercial companies.
Having companies and individuals supporting him: https://feross.org/thanks/
As well as offering actual support contracts: https://feross.org/support/
When I worked with some security folks and they'd get vulnerabilities and etc recognition was a big deal. The security researches (or hackers, whatever you wanted to call them) who reached out to us loved getting their name in release notes or wherever they could point to.
It made sense as it was legitimate recognition of some seriously helpful work. Cost the company nothing to put it in there and made some folks super happy.
If they start making demands for fixes, enhancements, etc., Then sure, by all means provide your $$$ rates, or encourage them to contribute to the project with their own programming time.
https://github.com/feross/safe-buffer/blob/master/index.js
It is 65 lines of Javascript that's mostly boilerplate. I doubt it saved them significantly more than the cost of manufacturing + shipping a Switch, or that they even used it directly. More likely this was just pulled in as an indirect dependency.
As an adult living in a world with other adults, if I want to get paid for my work, then I'm going to setup that interaction ahead of time.
If I wanted to con people, then maybe I would put something of value out for anyone to take. Then once people take it, I would pressure them for something of value in return.
If I give out a gift and it makes someone want to give me a gift in return, then that's nice. But they aren't required to give me a gift. That's the whole point of giving a gift in the first place. It doesn't setup a compulsory need to reciprocate.
Were I to write code for your company, I bet you wouldn't let me release the code to anyone else (I can see it in your little eyes) and you'd definitely demand to control what I write and how quickly. It's externally motivated. The external motivation I choose is money.
"Oh, hm, well we don't really want to give away free consoles this time around. And if we don't then it will make us look bad because we did last time. So don't use that code."
As a dev, I don't really want to have to check with 50 other divisions in the company before I use some open sourced stuff. And then get denied because of some unrelated PR event is going on.
But, as soon as you start paying, you have: 1.) All the other open source code they're presumably using possibly in more trivial ways and 2.) As soon as money enters the question it can become a matter of "My library probably saved Nintendo tens of thousands of dollars in development costs and all I got is this lousy console. No wonder people say open source development isn't sustainable." (Whether that was the case here or not.) It might have been a nice gesture but it could easily be taken the wrong way.
But then you might think, for some things anyway, Wait a minute, you're recognising the value you get out of it... and you're valuing it at only ~£300 (or whatever).
I think 'just trying to be nice' could back-fire.
On the other hand pushing it hard so it becomes a 'thing' would leave a bad taste in my mouth. Although rewarding OSS is something every major company should strive for (In Nintendos case specifically I'd be personally be surprised given what I've heard about Japanese corporate culture, but I'm just speculating here).
But it is indeed a good marketing strategy, at least if the HR and marketing teams were even aware of such things (ie, people who have control of sending out freebies). Which is why having technical leadership throughout the company always helps. Ultimately it will come down to an organizational thing.
Sending out free consoles would just be a marketing gimmick, and could just as well backfire as “you can’t eat a console, do Nintendo really think consoles are the way to support open source maintainers?” etc
Just simply supporting OSS directly, as in real money, is more than enough to quiet these "they should give x freebie".
That is all the mob should be calling for as a standard practice. Not sending some random developer who happened to get popular on Twitter a nintendo.
I’d personally be satisfied contributing to the world of software so broadly. That’s why you do open source, making the worlds software better for everyone.
Monetizing something called ‘safe buffer’, or even to the point of pushing for a freebie and a thank you card on social media, seems silly to me (which I don't think OP was doing, only in the replies).
If it was some commercial license for a small Node library, which they had every right to choose, it would have probably died in obscurity anyway. And what good does that do the software world.
Meanwhile getting to say your code is used by Nintendo Switch on your resume, or bragging rights to your nephew or whomever, seems more than enough to me. Part of the hacker ethos.