Re:Amazon: Not OK – Why we had to change Elastic licensing
by pjmlp on Wednesday January 20, 2021 @01:56AM
(#25843309)
Here is my advice, other professions pay for the tools they use for their job.
Re:Amazon: Not OK – Why we had to change Elastic licensing
by goatinaboat on Wednesday January 20, 2021 @03:05AM
(#25843806)
Here is my advice, other professions pay for the tools they use for their job.
Actually outside of the webdev bubble most companies are willing to pay for software too. SolarWinds in the news for all the wrong reasons now but their bread-and-butter was selling things to big corporations that webdevs would demand for free.
I do not criticize or defend Amazon's parasitic relationship with FOSS. Frankly, I don't yet see how it can be any other way. I just merely acknowledge the plain truth. And that Amazon is better at this than the other belligerents.
While I'm a very happy Amazon Prime customer, I'd never be an employee or otherwise do business with Amazon. I just feel like there's no way for me to benefit proportionally. Per the parable of the lion's share.
> ...the wrong assumptions how to make money out of MIT/BSD style licenses.
Go on.
I'm hoping someone, anyone will discuss Peter Hintjens' (ZeroMQ) advice.
I have three projects in my back pocket. Once seen, their secret sauce is trivially reproduced. I can think of no way to publish them as anything other than FOSS. Not even as a service. Nor can I figure out how to pay rent working on them.
Which is a pity. These three tools are pretty neat.