not sure I feel that great about all these open source projects becoming VC-funded enterprises. There's going to be so many bodies on the roadside in a couple of years once that seed funding starts running out. :s

at the same time, as a tooling person, I want them to succeed, and I want to see if they can prove some level of viability for actual companies making $ doing tooling for community. I'm just not convinced you can do that with a permissive open source model? idgi

Show thread

can someone ELI5 wtf Deno, Rome, Snowpack, etc actually expect to _sell_ that will pay people's salaries, or is the expectation that they'll "come up with something" down the road?...

Show thread

love 2 set VC money on fire in exchange for selling your soul to them tho. That always works out great.

Show thread

@zkat As someone who has seen this play out multiple times there's only a few options:

1) Try to make a "pro" version that is compelling enough to have folks subscribe

2) Try to figure out how to get the organization in a state where a MS, Oracle, or some other company wants to acquire your debt

3) Put the screws to everyone when the bills come due and shed employees like a cat sheds hair during springtime. Meanwhile the community forks your product and creates a foundation to support it

@craigmaloney @zkat

See, 3) is the best outcome because you've turned investor capital into public good. So if you're going the VC route, you need to focus on building an independent grassroots community that can take over the product when the company inevitably craters.

@zkat I've even felt weird about taking corporate sponsorship, and am still trying to figure out a way to do that where it won't either affect my projects or make me hate myself. >.>

@zkat *sobs in anxiety and depression caused by a combination of burnout and internalized toxic-masculinity*

@zkat Not to mention how the context gap of a tool designed by a well-capitalized org _for_ well-captalized orgs results in higher tooling and labor costs for lower-capitailzed orgs.

React is expensive to develop and maintain over the long-haul; not because it's bad software; but because it's designed for orgs whose unit of measurable production is _at least_ a full-time team.

NPO/NGO/MB/MA orgs just don't have that funding or capacity.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!