Give me ONE (1) good reason why software i worked on should be

>>60487992
I wouldn't use it if it's proprietary.

because you shouldn't make a million dollars for something that cost ~24hrs of your time

your software can be free and still be sold for money.

anyway, i prefer free software, but if i have the opportunity to sell it for shekels, i will. it's a doggy dog world.

>>60487992
How can property be theft if nobody owns anything?

>>60487992
Because people can easily pirate and crack your software.

There isn't one.

>>60487992
there is none

Because your code is probably shit OP. You might as well make it free and upload it to git so good devs can help unfuck it

>>60488027
why?

If I wake up tomorrow and find a cure for cancer while I'm taking a shit, I expect to get a lot more than a million dollars, even if it took me 2 minutes.

>>60488041
i think you mean dog-eat-dog world

>>60487992
When was the last time you bought software? Hard mode: phone apps and video games don't count.

>>60487992
It shouldn't if you don't want it to.
But don't get angry if someone makes an alternative and offers it for free.

>>60488157
cuz it's not fair dude, it's a gift to be an amazing programmer or scientist, you should use that gift to help people, not get rich

>>60488751
"not fair" illiterate fucking commies.

File: 220px-Christopher_Poole_at_XOXO_Festival_September_2012.jpg (10KB, 220x284px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 220x284px

>>60488015
Though you are on 4chan

>commies have never read a philosophy book
>commies don't understand that humans have a negative right to life, liberty, and property
>commies don't understand that having a political belief system that hinges on infringing on any of these three negative rights comes with a guarantee of morally acceptable violence against the initiators of force

Commies must die.

>>60488818
when you stand before god, you will be judged harshly for your selfish actions

>>60488899
>implying God is real
>implying protecting my only moral rights and the moral rights of others would be judged poorly by a deity

nice meme

>>60488161
doggy

If you look closely to the open source and free software movements, none of them gives a shit if you want to sell the software. And, depending on whom you're looking at, they just want you to release the code to those you're selling it to.

Why can't you just reason it out yourself? As if my opinion means anything to you. You should just sit down and consider it with your own perspective, you'll get your answer on what to do with your product. What's a good reason for me may not be a good reason for you, what works for me may not for you. What I'm saying is, don't be such a bitch nigga, think for yourself beta boi.

>>60488157
>cure for cancer

this triggers me

Nothing is stopping you from selling it. But it's unethical to exploit users of something you program by leaving them helpless without access to the source code.

>>60487992
Because fuck you that's why.

>>60487992
You have the right to make money software you worked on,but you don't have the right to charge people for making copies of said software.
You own the data on your computer,but you sure as hell don't own the data on other people's computers.

>>60490853
Why do yo uthink they deserve access to my source code? They didnt create it, I did.

>there are people that unironically believe property is bad.
>they post in the same board as you
>they are probably ITT.

>>60491746

You obviously don't understand freedom.

>>60491795
I am free to do with what i create.
No one is entitled to things i create.

>>60488818
have you actually ever spoken to a commie? They speak in philosophical gibberish. You can hear some quote the "Property is theft" thing, then you get others arguing over that using obscure 19th century philosophy jargon and books. If anything they are way too detached

>>60491804

So, hypothetically, if perfect decompilers were a thing, you wouldn't even bother to create anything? Or would you pursue coercive and violent means to make sure no one uses your special snowflake code?

>>60491835
have you? they haven't actually read marx they just repeat common quotes

>>60491560

So theoretically, one person should be able to buy the software, and then copy and distribute it online for free?

Because if that's the case, the maker is practically only entitled to make money off of donations and everyone else can access a copy for free.

>>60491923
it's almost like the payment models for software is outdated and not profitable, and we use government to prop up bad business methods, like everything else we rely on government for

>>60491560
I own the right to copy it.

File: feelin supreme.png (550KB, 875x557px) Image search: [Google]

550KB, 875x557px

>>60487992
There is no "reason." You can do whatever you want with your software. Fuck any socialist scum ITT.

Just don't be butthurt when I crack it and distribute it for free. No, I will never get arrested or fined lol

>>60491945

But the only viable alternative for software companies to make money is one where the applications are either full of popups soliciting donations, or full of advertisements.

I'm happy to pay for a quality product and comply with its terms of use if it's worth my money. The offer and payment is a voluntary contract that I'm entering into. I'm free to walk away and use the free alternative.

>>60491951
no,you just own the bits on your computer just like a farmer owns the potatoes he grew and not the potatoes somebody else grew even if he used the farmer's methods

>>60487992
Any software is simply a solution to a problem. The ethical thing to do is to help each other solve problems. I think ethical reasons are the best reasons, you clearly don't. Why are you pretending to ask a genuine question?

a point will come when there will be no value in software
same is true with pretty much everything; salt became valueless with the advent of refrigeration; as computers have gotten smaller, their collective value has plummeted; eventually something will come along (a healthy open source community, more government regulation, whatever) that will render your software and the work you've put into it obsolete
so enjoy it while it lasts

>>60487992
>work hard designing something that can easily be copied
>get mad when someone copies it
the only way to "own" information is to keep it secret

>>60492051
>But the only viable alternative for software companies to make money is one where the applications are either full of popups soliciting donations, or full of advertisements.
That's a pretty big assumption. Just because you can't think of business models doesn't mean they don't exist. Here's one example:

https://www.patreon.com/bcachefs
https://www.patreon.com/Nekotekina
https://www.patreon.com/cemu

>>60492073

No, there's not an ethical duty to help other people. If you live on a mountain and choose not to contribute anything to society, it doesn't make you a bad person. Same if you retire and stop working or contributing to society in any way.

>>60492123
my cousin is an """""""""""artist"""""""""""""
he and the other guys in his local art scene are extremely protective of their craft, because if word got out that you can buy higher quality Chinese shit for 1/10 the price they'll all have to go back to working at the gas station

>>60492140
I know such fellows as well.
I always thought real works of art were supposed to be unique and thus impossible to copy. "Artists" don't seem to think so though.

>>60492063

And that means with a hypothetical perfect decompiler, I could have a proprietary binary converted to editable code and use it however I wish.

Intellectual property is the threat of violence by the state for the benefit of idea 'owners'.

>>60492126
Yeah but there's no ethical issue in reverse engineering your code either, and that's the way knowledge works.

>>60491870
The "property is a theft" quote is from Proudhon. Commies dont quote him, anarchists do, just like the Bread book. Just like you will not find Chairman L'Mao's Red book under a red and black flag. And even if they only knew quotes, they still talk in very alien terms to those not familiar with philosophy. You are not going to find many conservatives or liberals that can quote The Rights of Man, or Hayek

>>60492063
you can't make analogies with real life examples idiot, people copying software aren't doing work, they're just copying.

>>60492252
>but
why are you adding in "but"? What you said is in no way contradictory to what he said, and doesn't rebuke him at all

>>60492318
then get a better job, one that can't be taken away

>>60487992
Because there are other ways to get money other than selling a product and basically, you're retarded.

>>60492126
>there's not an ethical duty to help other people
Yes, there is.

>If you live on a mountain and choose not to contribute anything to society, it doesn't make you a bad person.
But that's a completely different situation than the one you're suggesting. You have a solution to a problem, instead of sharing that solution with the world, and allowing everybody to benefit from it, and probably improve it, you choose to keep it a secret and charge money for it.

Again, why are you pretending to ask a genuine question?

>>60492332
sorry?

>>60492337
>I have nothing to support my opinion so the only thing I can do is call you a retard hurrdurrr
you don't get to decide how someone makes money, the free market does.

>>60492318
Yea that's a pretty bad attempt at an analogy,but the point is that you can't do shit if your data is already in the open and people who bitch about it are morons.

>>60492392
in 20 years there will be a (conservatively estimated) million nurse shortage in the USA
double that when you remove ADN programs, which is probably going to happen
my job is safe, yours is fucked

>>60487992
Because you're a generous little fruity pie that loves in your mom's basement so you don't need money

>>60492336
but software is selling millions? it's only filthy FOSSils that want to shut it down

>>60492423
>software is selling millions
what did he mean by this

>>60492400
seeing that most trackers are down, I'd say there is much that can be done about it

I'll gladly pay for it if I the program is free software

>>60492410
the mental gymnastics lol. first of all which job do you even assume I have? second, what does your post have to even do with mine? My sister is an RN, but what exactly does that have to do with any of this?

>>60490730
C O N G R A T U L A T I O N S
>>60488751
>cuz
Stopped reading there.

>>60492337
That's the point of the human adaptative memory, human beings are always "copying" things. That the way it works.

>>60492500
I assume you're OP or an OP apologist
my point is that jobs in tech are going to disappear once Indian people start coming over on curry boats and do all the work for much, much less

>>60492442
Look, if you had one tracker, or one seed
To seize everything you ever wanted, in one download
Would you copy it or just let it slip?

>>60492525
underrated post

>>60492524
what? that already happened with H1-B visas, and now trump is cracking down on them with tighter immigration. if anything the opposite should happen and more jobs should open up with silicon valley being emptied out. I've had atleast 5 friends get job offers from google after the election because of exactly this.

>>60488914
Only commies don't believe in God. You also capitalized God which means you acknowledge him as a person :^)

>>60487992
software like yours is the reason hospitals are forced to run decades old systems and suffer attacks like wannacrypt

opensource can be reviewed, patched, modernized and ported as necessary even if you decide to fuck over all your users by leaving the market and taking your code with you

closed source is good for nothing but greed and has done nothing hut saddling the world up with TONS of preventable and hella expensive problems

>>60492125
Is Patreon not the donation model mentioned in >>60492051? It's a subscription donation but it's still a donation model.

>>60488818
How about you read a book nigger. It's not a hard concept to decipher.
99% of man's existence has been tribal in nature,. and recognizing property is a very recent aberration in our behavior. It's certainly something natural and self-evident like liberalism claims. Property is theft because the concept arose when somebody, be he a warlord, shaman, or some other manipulator, confiscated the fruits of our collective survival efforts and cordoned them off for his personal use, either with violence, or the threat of violence.

lolberts are autistic as fuck about application of force yet fail to see how it's ingrained into private property.

>>60487992
because you probably already got paid to write it anyway ? thats how it works for me

>>60492669
>nature argument
what a fucking joke

>>60492669
>An appeal to nature is an argument or rhetorical tactic in which it is proposed that "a thing is good because it is 'natural', or bad because it is 'unnatural'".[1] It can be a bad argument, because the implicit (unstated) primary premise "What is natural is good" typically is irrelevant, having no cogent meaning in practice, or is an opinion instead of a fact. In some philosophical frameworks where natural and good are clearly defined in a specific context, the appeal to nature might be valid and cogent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature

understand your own fallacious argument you fucking hippie faggot

>rent an apartment
>start renting it out to 200 pajeets who shit on the floor
>tell owner that he's infringing your freedom by telling you that you can't house 200 pajeets in his apartment
That's what freetards sound like.

>>60492796
When I buy software, Im buying a program for a computer to do. Imagine we lived in a world where you could buy programs that would control your body while you're asleep. Would you run one without being sure it doesnt take a second to read your credit card's sec code? Same with computers. Its not about the price. Its about the right of the user to use one's compiter as they see fit

because selling support is much more profitable than trying to sell a product. your shit will be pirated regardless.
>>60488818
fuck off back to >>>/pol/

>>60492525
I'm not a jew, so no.

>>60492796
What if you 200 exact copies of the apartment and give to the indians for free?

>>60492702
>>60492731
how ironic... lolberals usually argue that shit should be the way it is because it's "human nature"...

>>60492896
>Im buying a program for a computer to do
That's false, you're just buying a license to use it. Just like with renting apartment.
Would you rent an apartment from a serial killer who will come at night and murder you? No, but you can never be sure that the owner isn't one.
You have a right to use your computer as you see fit, sure, so if a license doesn't suit you, then either buy a license that doesn't trigger your autism (that will likely be expensive), or don't use the program and stop trying to force people to stop doing whatever they line with their property.

>>60493018
>lolberals usually argue that shit
yes, and liberals as well as left libertarians make ignorant fallacious arguments, just like yours

>>60493032
>renting apartment
Not really.Its more like renting one of infinite possible copies of the apartment.The owner loses nothing if you don't pay for it,because he did not put work into your copy and he can still use the original.

The whole licensing this is nothing but jew schemes. Real businessman programmers make custom software under contract with big companies.

>>60493101
Doesn't matter if I own one apartment, a billion or infinity. An agreement is an agreement, if you want to be able to give away my apartment, we can write an agreement on that, but obviously it will cost you much more.
If you think the agreement is unfair, then don't sign on it and don't use my services. I'll surely find many people who find that acceptable.

>>60493171
You're not giving away anything.It's like you invent a new fucking dance move and charge people to use it.
Not paying rent is stealing because the owner has buy the place and spend time and money on maintenance,and the owner can't rent it out to other people if you're inside the apartment.

>>60493289
If I'm not giving away anything, then you're obviously not receiving the software.
I can offer you a deal where you are allowed to use my software in ways that I specify for a payment.
If you agree to my terms, we have a deal.
If you don't, you're not using getting it.
How is that so hard to understand? In any society people are allowed to make agreements and there is someone who enforces them. If you don't like a deal, don't take it.

Also, I obviously spent time and money to create and maintain my software, and I can't sell it if you're just giving it away. But that's beyond the point. The point is that people form voluntary agreements that are to be respected.

>>60488751
>>>60488157
>cuz it's not fair dude, it's a gift to be an amazing programmer or scientist, you should use that gift to help people, not get rich
Fuck off commie

File: Brugmansia_bicolor.jpg (17KB, 220x336px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 220x336px

>>60487992
Someone is forcing you to offer it for free or release your internet history.

You ate some of [pic related].

>>60492669
Appeal to nature and also just flat out wrong. The majority of humanity was not tribal, it was bands-based. Tribal society came later when horticulture came about. Piss off, commie. You are not even an educated commie, shit dick.

File: NewHere.jpg (103KB, 473x480px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 473x480px

>>60488161

assholes like you are the people who deliberately cripple IT into the clusterfuck of legalities and lack of maintenance that it is today. You take something that could be so flexible, functional, beautiful and advanced, and cuck it into your worthless unmaintainable shit that'll saddle tons of people up with problems that could easily be prevented but cant be fixed.

You know those videos of chinese tourists being careless assholes and destroying things like art and artifacts everywhere they go? thats what closedsource is to IT.

>>60487992
It depends of the usage and purpose.

If it's useful tool for niche group, bit proprietary and obscure... Should be distributed free because in any way it couldn't be that useful for large amount of people.

If it's a toy to please most amount of people, made for "normal" (i.e. vegetative) folks, it should cost money.

When you think about it, this makes perfect sense. This is why Apple exists. They make people believe they need their over simplified gadgets etc. Okay this went bit too far but you get the idea.

You don't make any money if you develop tool which only few hundred people use. You make money by mass marketing shit. This also applies to software.

Because it's your property and you can do whatever the hell you want with it.

>>60487992
because better free alternatives to whatever shitware you came up with probably already exist.

>>60494560
Paying for something should be the first priority. You need to think about your long term gain. Is it worth to pay for small utility and you'll then get, what, 200$ at the end of the year? Out of principle you should just release the software and forget it and develop something else.

Term of 'paying for something' should mean to you, 'the maker' that you will gain your living out from your work. If the piece of software is not popular to produce long term gain don't bother to even sell it.

>>60494591
Also complaining about GNU and Unix shit has this issue: You will never get any fucking money for developing them unless you work in a niche industry - medical, defense, 3d animation... If you complain that you can't sell your little "unix" tool you don't understand fucking anything...

You should develop on a platform which is already a commercial one and think about available choices.

>>60487992
We long as it doesn't have botnet i am fine with it

>>60491560
yeah he does, it's called copyright. the rights to copy something. most relevant countries have a form of basic copyright protection in their legal system. It doesn't matter who owns the data, all that matters is who has rights to copy it. It's up to the copyright owner to license the works so that they may be copied.

>>60487992
There is zero reason to release free software.
4chan is the autistic subset of the internet, they have no market value beyond the exchange of Good Boy Points.

>>60494623
You know it's completely legal to offer different licenses for a product. QT is one such example, their free version is under LGPL so that they can support the free software ecosystem, and for companies who want to use it for their proprietary works they offer a paid license.

So much is possible with selling software, you don't have to just sell the product itself, you can also sell support like what Redhat does for companies.

File: 1342315548476.jpg (217KB, 639x480px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 639x480px

>>60487992
Sell it for money. It's your right. But don't blame me when crackers crack your software and made it free as in free beer.

>>60487992
>property is theft
No. Taxation is theft.

>>60488046
It can't be if nobody owns things. Since people do own things today, that which is owned is theft.

>>60487992
It should be free if you decide it's free.
As to why you should decide it's free is so that it can reach more people and that other people could contribute to improving your work (while you still get to claim it's your work - see Linus Torvalds). If you don't want to make it free that's up to you. /myTwoCents

>>60493598
So you think all laws are communism?

>>60487992
No one cares if the software is paid to use, free software people just want to be able to view/modify/patch the code.
Just look at aseprite, they manage just fine, even sell it on steam.
I also think most old games and programs would benefit from GPL because the community would have easier job of patching and modding them, while noone expects any profit from abandonware, but crappy hd remakes are unfortunatly the future.

>>60494713
>There is zero reason to release free software.
time to stop living under a rock m8, you're denying reality at a level trannies used to have monopoly on

>>60495638
it's called being part of society. Don't like tax? Fine, leave. No more tax but you don't get to ride my back or use any of the stuff my willing participation pays for.

Companies and their owners have nothing to complain about anyway, no matter how heavily they are taxed they still swim in privileges and wealth

>>60495806
>I also think most old games and programs would benefit from GPL because the community would have easier job of patching and modding them, while noone expects any profit from abandonware, but crappy hd remakes are unfortunatly the future.
applies to things like control stations for specialist machinery too. If all that sort of software was opensource, we wouldn't have hospitals running expensive windows 95 systems and going down with the slightest breeze in their direction

>>60488015
your ISP is using proprietary software which you connect to the internet through, so fuck off

That's like making a painting, selling the painting, then asking why you should not be paid every time someone takes a photo of said painting.

>>60488157
You know that makes you an evil person, right?

>>60496860
>muh-analogies
Seriously this is the worst thing freetards do, try to make an analogy that doesnt even fit, along with calling you evil for doing whatever the analogy is supposed to attack

>>60496909
The analogy fits perfectly, kid.

If there is a need for software, someone will pay you to create it (i.e. sell the original painting).

Then they can make copies with no additional work from you (i.e. taking photos of the original painting).

Just because you are too stupid to understand the analogy or lack the ability to counter the point, doesn't mean the analogy isn't perfectly fitting.

>>60492963
You're not a jew, so you think big corp should get paid for every single time someone watches a movie/listens to some music... Yeah that doesn't sound jewish at all lad...

File: whistler's mother.jpg (66KB, 800x331px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 800x331px

>this is what freecucks defend
This is exactly what would happen in art if people followed Stallmans philosophy. Sad!

>>60497172
Nope, nobody is even touching the original. Your analogy is wrong again. Try again.

>>60497120
>so you think big corp should get paid for every single time someone watches a movie/listens to some music
I think the creators should be able to make profit off a software if they wish to do so. Even open source software agrees with this.
>nobody is even touching the original.
Actually, the original did get touched.

>Property is theft
Taxation is theft, tucking cucks

>>60496953
Did that someone pay me for the program, or just the license to use it in some specified ways? If it's the former, then sure, he can do whatever he wants. It's what companies do when they order enterprise pajeetsoft. If it's the latter, he can't make copies, because that's not covered by the license he bought (well, unless it is). He is not the owner of this program, and he has to abide by the voluntary agreement he entered into. If he doesn't like it, he can pay (much more) to buy the program, or just not use it.

>>60496953
Who's they?

If I get hired to create software for someone and they decide to release the source code for free or sell it along with the license then I cant do anything about it, because I dont own the code. But if I start selling my own software without the source code and have a restricting license then they cannot distribute it (unless they use a chinese crack, but you'd be better off licking a toilet at a gay club).

>>60497222
>Actually, the original did get touched.
Actually, no it didn't. It got copied.

>>60497222
>I think the creators should be able to make profit
But they are. They're making huge profits in fact. Consumers should still be able to make copies and share those, the two are perfectly compatible.

>>60487992
How exactly does theft even exist if property doesn't

>>60497287
Actually, no. It got touched.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfqyQNJmfR8
>>60497303
>Consumers should still be able to make copies and share those
If I want to, maybe.

>>60497314
It doesn't, obviously, since the two are synonymous. Have you always been this dumb?

>>60487992
Free software doesn't mean you can't sell it.
You can put it on a usb and sell it for whatever you want as long as you don't stick drm on it have a license agreement that says buyers can't tinker with the source code.

>>60497319
>Actually, no. It got touched.
Oh you're talking about a scene in a movie. I thought you were talking about piracy/copying in general, my bad.

>>60497330
Why do you care about theft if you don't think property should exist?
Not like you ever wanted to own things

>>60497350
>Why do you care about theft if you don't think property should exist?
lolwat? Theft is criminal and I consider it unethical. That's why I think property, which IS theft, shouldn't exist. Seriously, have you always been this dumb?

>>60497319
>If I want to
Exactly, glad you agree there is nothing wrong with piracy.

>>60487992
buggy

File: 1490482904970.jpg (28KB, 720x474px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 720x474px

>>60487992
You don't make money with it anymore and the codebase is still can be useful for some. See Presto.
>>60488791
I use it to fight against proprietary software

>>60497380
I meant if I want other people to make copies. If I do not want that they can't do it.

>>60488157
>find a cure for cancer while I'm taking a shit,
Well... You can't, but in theory you would be killed and robbed if someone gone full Shkreli on prices on a stuff on like this.
>inb4 commie
Who is Edward Salk? A much better and smarter person than you.

>>60497432
>If I do not want that they can't do it.
Yes they can, and they will. And there is nothing wrong with making copies of something you paid for.

>>60497461
There is, because when I sold that piece of software, I explicitly said that you can't make copies of it or distribute it to third parties, and sold it to you on that condition, and you agreed to that condition.

>>60497517
>you agreed to that condition
No I didn't. You were just gullible enough to believe I did. I didn't even read your silly conditions. Morals trump man made regulations every time.

>>60497517
>distribute it to third parties
Steam failed in this. A snot like you, will fail even faster.

>>60497558
You did though. If you didn't read it then that's your problem, not mine, but I can take it to court if I wish.
>>60497572
edgy

>>60497581
>You did though. If you didn't read it then that's your problem, not mine
I didn't though. If you assume everybody reads your silly rules that's your problem, not mine. You can pay and try to take me to court if you wish. Good luck with that lol.

>>60492020
Don't be mad when I move my product to a cloud-based delivery platform where you have to sign in and provide personal information to one of the most security-backwater companies in the world.

t. Adobe Creative Cloud/Microsoft 365/Salesforce/etc.

>>60497602
Have you ever signed a contract? If you sign one you are literally agreeing to its terms. Of course, I get the feeling you're 12 years old so I'm going to stop replying to you.

>>60487992
You can have both, OP. You could licence it (L)GPL and commercial, like Qt does.

>>60497633
I have signed contracts, yes. Buying a movie with some silly conditions attached to it is not signing anything. Courts overwhelmingly agree with me on this one. But sure, stop replying because you know you lost, it happens all the time. Happy copying!

>>60488751
its not a fucking "gift", dipshit. It's hard work to get good, and I mean really good, not "I CAN COMPILE"-good. All the hard years invested in getting good dont pay itself. I would happily give my shit away for free if society would pay me for studying so that I get good and know my shit. But they dont do that, so fuck off with your "gibs me" mentality.

>>60491804
you have to look at the source code as the product you're selling.

>>60488751
>A gift
It's hard work. You are not born knowing assembler and how a fucking machine works

>>60497823
It's both. Not everybody can learn, no matter how much work they put into it.