Compensation and Success at the foundation of Open Source

Today @rjdavid made such a clean and crisp observation ( perhaps sparing a lot of my life ) and solving a background problem I had been discussing with my partner. I could feel a weight lift just at the realization I had over thought the solution by a lot, just by forgetting or not getting the memo on how far PWA has advanced since I first assessed it. I said I could hug him and suppressed the desire to find a tip jar, because that would be an insult compared to what the advice ought to earn, if I value it how I do. Especially long term.

I am aware “finance” is really not just about capital, but also equity, debt, and gift. And in the background of */OSS there is always a desire for money in the form of gift ( which is two things, capital, and capital as gift ) but as a principal I just feel like we are cutting our veins because we are thirsty, and I would rather keep the blood and go get water from a renewable source which is clean. Why not take the advice to the bank ( i.e. do something that returns value ) not forget, and then at least offer something back that is life-altering in value?

I thought to comment more directly between the company interests and volunteers. Tiny and Meteor Software in my opinion, today, not caring about the past pretty much whatsoever, do awesomely. And they volunteer. They are a volunteer, and a brand owner. Staying MIT licensed, responding very fast in the forums, investing in important directions, hiring actual ninjas, and a long list of other things make me feel not like distrusting them. Over time, I might even be loyal. But across from that is an inherent distrust and argument from uncertainty, saying “it might all burn! ahhh!!!” and that to me feels scared, anxious, and basically not coding strong. I distrust that sentiment.

And having been a maintainer who resurrected a software community and its underlying codebase, if I needed to be recognized for that, or needed any emotional compensation in return, I should get a puppy and let it lick my face. Just saying, I am watching for “addaboy!” as a currency, and shoot to kill. We need more, better, different. Love, freedom, and other higher rewards for will are much more fulfilling than notary or money. Obviously, we need all the lesser things though too, but not as the point.

If not being scared, and if trusting the current reality based on actual value provided today, I think about the future and think… even just these recommendations that prevented me from being stupid(er) deserve a reward that neither a beer or coffee, not a gift of capital in sponsorship, and not any of the standard */OSS customs provide. I might save millions even mid-term compared to being an idiot, always. And get back years, not just in time, but in quality of life within that time.

Now, what does that legally look like in finance? Accounting for international law, various national, regional, local, differences in corporate formation forms in all those, variations in exchange token, etc… It looks like having actual courage and integrity and saying, “if @rjdavid ended up being right today, and I look back in X time I saved myself hell by listening to him” or “because @leonardoventurini voiced courage in the desire to shift paradigm in design pattern” or any of these kinds of pivotal moments of decision … I owe him.

A lot of this is private and most people just code feverishly to make the guilt go away on not giving back, or they give back by clicking a pink heart and pulling out their metaphorical or literal wallet. But if we have real success in mind and are not satisfied with fidget spinners or yet another way to share cat and meal photos or stalk people, there will be serious capital generated by not being ignorant, and being challenged, and leveraging MIT licensed code.

Often companies do equity deals with top performers. VCs buy equity positions. Whether as a security or an asset, it is the same concept in the heart of the person signing the deal, if you are dealing with a non-machine, someone invested not just roboprofiting by the blood/sweat/tears of others in a different tier in finance. But that is a serious mess especially with corporate transparency and the change of "Beneficial Owner" definition, etc. I shudder at the level of nightmare equity compensation just got created by FinCEN for example. Overall, the way to “put our money where our mouth is” got super complicated for adults who feel things like “he saved my life” or “that just stopped me from wasting 3-5 houses worth of resources long-term” … but there are many, many answers.

Rather than go into those I want to just change the conversation from us vs. them and distrust as a premise with backward-looking more than forward-looking mental activity and emotional investment… and certainly not “other people are doing it so let’s get on that” but look at Meteor at what it is, which is a rooted innovation, built on making life better and be more awesome, and not waiting for permission, and not waiting for the entire field to discover bravery or lose their hobbyist attitude in a sea change in all of history and culture…

I would wager right now that before a non-profit could get out of its diapers, and up to maturity, whether using a partner to outsource compliance on the issues I mentioned that are major hassles and seriously dangerous, and whether outsourcing governance to a big brother organization and following orders but getting a “fun life” in return and popularizing terms like “digital nomad” which means usually “has no roots anymore” in a serious way… ( takes one to know one ) … before any non-profit movement could get into the range where it could pay one reasonable livelihood to a maintainer… and before a massive corporate restructuring might threaten the present status quo which seems good, even cool, possibly even special compared to the dumpster fires out there… I bet the success of those of us focused on awesome and making serious impact at the most basic level and all the way to the edge of what people do with their devices… I bet that would outpace revenue on both sides and go straight down the middle, on pure honesty. If it saved me years, or brought me a better life during a huge chunk of time, or my people, or my audience… does that not deserve return?

I am holding back from talking about solutions but the problem is far better framed, or the bad framing hopefully seems harder to accept. We are not in a bad situation. We are not at risk. There is not struggle and suffering and history to overcome, etc. Looking at right now, today, and many times recently… there is something better here than most everywhere else, so how do I make that stand the test of time?

Home Owner Associations think like that. Automobile and other asset owners think like that. Interested Parties ( legal term ) think like that. I say Open Source ought to think like that, more than everyone else, because if not being ridiculous more often than not, this stuff we make and what we do changes life across the board.

1 Like

Do you have the audiobook version of this book?

2 Likes

Apple Intelligence to the rescue:

The author emphasizes the importance of recognizing and rewarding valuable contributions in open source projects, particularly those that prevent costly mistakes. They propose a shift in mindset from fear and distrust to trust and gratitude, valuing the impact of advice and guidance. The author suggests that open source projects should adopt a more business-like approach, considering the long-term value of contributions and exploring legal avenues for recognizing and rewarding them.

3 Likes

In future I have no problem providing walkthrough audio with notes on screen, as a presentation, at key points, if worth it. I do a lot of video presentations of >3 hour complex considerations boiled down to <20 minutes, or <5 minutes or less sometimes, for principals.

And by the way, one who did not read does not know. At best they are a spectator. If there is serious engagement, one will read. Judges read. And if not, no longer a judge. We value the reader being able to see through the document and not be hung up or moving too fast mentally to cast a decision. But we also need a sense of what is going on and whether it applies to us, so I would do that part. If that is preferred alongside written notes ( “written” being a requirement of movement toward formation, and “motion” is a legal term underneath “movement” ) … no problem at all.

@paulishca I noticed your follow-up / thread-off with the phrase “equity kind of association” and :clap: so I believe you are serious, and paying attention. I would back you up in whatever way I can since you seem sincere and active, not just in code, but in leadership thinking. You do not seem like a mercenary coder, but a co/founder. Not a volunteer only. Not the employee of an other. Independent, with partners or not, but independent.

Navigating international jurisdictions is an awesome topic I am restraining myself from getting into now. And if interested I will contribute on that in a new founders category, versus startups or ideas because being a founder is way more than all the hype and buzzwords. It is a fiduciary situation, and separates the community into "responsible to others' and their rights" and "great coder, love 'em" or "brings a great influence" but not "gets the document and has to sign, and show up if it fails, and go to jail if it really really goes wrong" down the middle.


Thought to give an example here now, still alongside the issues, not solving the problem for the community itself, but thinking about the individual:

Being able to make a living as a */OSS maintainer, committer, or original author can be difficult, and I see many try it and fail. But plenty succeed, and I don’t mean like Evan You … which is rare. I mean in a way that sustains one individual who might remain unknown for the most part. Or stay a low-key hobbyist, or be minimalist, or whatever else, just not “go big” in */OSS like a few have.

The “not famous” group, I believe, would fork a repository of business tools to make their own practice.

Being able to spin up a living the same way we spin up an instance of an example application, then just doing what has to happen to make a life for one’s self, really would just be */OSS realizing:

Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day.
Teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.

We skip that truth in our thinking and just send fish like it’s Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy … or we make others send fish. Or we beg for fish and show progress deserving of fish, etc.

Associations become 10x more important then since one is not some obscure rando anymore, but that goes to the true problem, which as seems to be proven here, this community excels with. I do not know who does actual business here other than be a Galaxy user, or becoming an employee of an other, but I suspect there are many who would do awesome as independents, and work side-by-side as well as share insights, encouragement, etc. “As long as it involves Meteor” for example.

"Every man for himself" is the truth all the way down, and that is what makes great friendships and alliances, because one is truly interested in himself or herself, which means this other party has actual value and deserves actual returns or rewards or respect, etc.

When I see huge documents where each individual coder or similar is trying to justify his or her existence all alone, trying to make enough to keep a volunteer lifestyle going, and failing or struggling; there being literally tens and hundreds of thousands if not millions of those ones now… I think "Open Source" is more than about "Software" at the end, and more than about "Free" or "Commercial" on the front. We have wisdom, experience, real ways, trade secrets, trail tips, actual opportunities, etc… why not get into that, and square-away individuals on purpose if we truly support awesome work?

Do we not rely? Is it not self-interest motivating us when we make sure they succeed? The “charity” model is most often insincere. Usually on both sides. But it is not out of being liars necessarily, whether to our self or others… it is just too limited a view of business and finance and law. Which totally makes sense because those are a mess, and we overcome that.

That is the true story underneath Meteor ( more than most */OSS ) … someone somewhere did not fall on their face long enough for others to also not fall on their faces, and here we are, still not falling on our faces, having encountered others like ourselves, and now we work toward more than “not falling on our faces” … but many still fall on their face weekly or monthly or daily! But they suck it up and try again, and just not let it show. We know it is going on. Why not solve that?

Not talking about self-marketing techniques! Talking about models that work, and entire git clone style get-it-done interventions one can see results in under 72 hours, or pivot; because anything more than that and you are into fantasy-land and spreading false hope. Persevering is not usually the answer, until you know the model is sound. And waiting for rain with tongue out, also not viable.

And not talking about paywalls! When one with a volunteer habit must pay to figure out how to stay a volunteer but also have a sustainable lifestyle and choose it not settle for it, that is catch-22 there.

If individuals were each successful, and chose to band together, the entire “foundation” concept evaporates, as does “corporate negotiation” because now we are all just free, and this is who we are.

Get Started is the */OSS keyword. Why not outside code and have that dovetail right back to code and not be a side-hustle? Plenty of coders would love to just clone something that works and do it, and would likely give back out of self-respect and not being a mooch, if that thing that worked for them kept working and updating itself with the times, etc.

@a4xrbj1 please, your translation is much appreciated …

Key points:

Walkthrough Audio Preference: The sender is open to providing walkthrough audio with notes on screen for presentations.
Reading Importance: The sender emphasizes the importance of reading for serious engagement and decision-making, especially in a legal context.
Founder vs. Coder Distinction: The sender highlights the difference between a founder and a coder, emphasizing the fiduciary responsibilities and legal implications of being a founder.
OSS Sustainability: Making a living from OSS can be challenging, but many individuals find sustainable ways to earn a living, often by forking repositories and building their own practices.
OSS Community Support: The OSS community excels at supporting each other, fostering a sense of belonging and collaboration.
Value-Based Relationships: True value in OSS comes from building relationships based on mutual interest and respect, leading to meaningful connections and collaborations.
Open Source Beyond Software: Open Source encompasses more than just software, including wisdom, experience, trade secrets, and opportunities.
Supporting Open Source Developers: The text emphasizes the importance of supporting Open Source developers and providing them with resources to succeed.
Effective Support Models: The author suggests practical and efficient support models, such as “git clone” style interventions, that can yield results within a short timeframe.
Volunteer Dilemma: People with a volunteer habit face a catch-22 when they need to pay for resources to maintain a sustainable volunteer lifestyle.
Foundation’s Role: Foundations and corporate negotiation might become unnecessary if individuals were successful and chose to collaborate.
OSS Integration: Integrating “Get Started” with OSS and code could attract coders who want to contribute and benefit from existing, working solutions.