The fact that open source exist and functions so well for decades shows that people do step 4. If no one wants to step in it usually means the project is not important.
I think what you’re missing is that the number of people doing step 4 has been going downhill steadily since the 2000s. People start open source projects yes, which for 99% of them don’t bring in any users and barely get maintained over the long run, but the pool of people willing to contribute to large established projects is so small it is becoming problematic.
Even Wikipedia is having its own editor crisis, where most of the power editors are greying out and barely anyone is stepping up to replace them.
And this is happening exactly because most people, like you, think that the free infrastructure around us is a fait accompli which doesn’t require us to personally get involved in their maintenance, and that we can even afford to scare away those that do contribute.
most people, like you, think that the free infrastructure around us is a fait accompli which doesn’t require us to personally get involved in their maintenance
I do contribute time and donate money to open source project so… miss?
With less contributors simply mean we will have to be smarter about which projects we supports. In open source it’s a natural process. People support projects they actually use and need. If we can’t get enough resources to support even the most basic infrastructure then the experiment will end.
I do contribute time and donate money to open source project so… miss?
You’re missing the point. Sure you do, that’s a nice anecdote, but the data shows most people don’t. You are part of a shrinking cohort that is already insufficient to maintain what we need in the long run.
If we can’t get enough resources to support even the most basic infrastructure then the experiment will end
And then what ? Only large corporations can finance their own in-house tools and they gain even greater advantage against the rest of society ? What a great outcome…
Your point of view is not crazy but i think it suffers from too much optimism in the face of bleak data.
You’re missing the point. Sure you do, that’s a nice anecdote, but the data shows most people don’t. You are part of a shrinking cohort that is already insufficient to maintain what we need in the long run.
But you accused me specifically of not contributing. If you’re making a broader point don’t single me out.
And then what ? Only large corporations can finance their own in-house tools and they gain even greater advantage against the rest of society ? What a great outcome…
Yes, that will be the outcome. And it will suck. I’m not optimistic, I’m realistic. If people wills top caring about open source it will die. Throwing AI at the problem may buy us some time but in the end LLMs also require resources and without support from community all the models will be controlled by corporations.
My sensation is that we’re doing fine for now. The community is still big enough for a decade or two. No idea what will happen after that.
If you’re making a broader point don’t single me out
Yes that is a communication lapse on my end, i try to make issues personal to emphasize them but it’s not always relevant. I don’t think it should detract from the broader point, sorry if it does.
My sensation is that we’re doing fine for now
I think the data shows that we’re far from fine and already resource-constrained on most critical projects. It’s not that people stop caring about open source, it is still fundamental to the way the web works. It’s just that they don’t feel personally compelled to pitch in because they think we’re doing fine now. The wikipedia analogy works well here : it is still fundamental to the way people get information, but it’s chronically understaffed and may already be in a death spiral.
Maybe you’re right. People have less resources and less spare time. Maybe we are fucked, even in the short-mid term. It looks pretty good to me (a lot of big players rely on Linux and core open source infrastructure, open source/self hosted tools are generally recognized as better for the business, we moved out from proprietary standards to open ones, there’s push for interoperability and so on) but maybe there are deeper issues I don’t see and it will all collapse sooner than I think.
The fact that open source exist and functions so well for decades shows that people do step 4. If no one wants to step in it usually means the project is not important.
I think what you’re missing is that the number of people doing step 4 has been going downhill steadily since the 2000s. People start open source projects yes, which for 99% of them don’t bring in any users and barely get maintained over the long run, but the pool of people willing to contribute to large established projects is so small it is becoming problematic.
Even Wikipedia is having its own editor crisis, where most of the power editors are greying out and barely anyone is stepping up to replace them.
And this is happening exactly because most people, like you, think that the free infrastructure around us is a fait accompli which doesn’t require us to personally get involved in their maintenance, and that we can even afford to scare away those that do contribute.
I do contribute time and donate money to open source project so… miss?
With less contributors simply mean we will have to be smarter about which projects we supports. In open source it’s a natural process. People support projects they actually use and need. If we can’t get enough resources to support even the most basic infrastructure then the experiment will end.
You’re missing the point. Sure you do, that’s a nice anecdote, but the data shows most people don’t. You are part of a shrinking cohort that is already insufficient to maintain what we need in the long run.
And then what ? Only large corporations can finance their own in-house tools and they gain even greater advantage against the rest of society ? What a great outcome…
Your point of view is not crazy but i think it suffers from too much optimism in the face of bleak data.
But you accused me specifically of not contributing. If you’re making a broader point don’t single me out.
Yes, that will be the outcome. And it will suck. I’m not optimistic, I’m realistic. If people wills top caring about open source it will die. Throwing AI at the problem may buy us some time but in the end LLMs also require resources and without support from community all the models will be controlled by corporations.
My sensation is that we’re doing fine for now. The community is still big enough for a decade or two. No idea what will happen after that.
Yes that is a communication lapse on my end, i try to make issues personal to emphasize them but it’s not always relevant. I don’t think it should detract from the broader point, sorry if it does.
I think the data shows that we’re far from fine and already resource-constrained on most critical projects. It’s not that people stop caring about open source, it is still fundamental to the way the web works. It’s just that they don’t feel personally compelled to pitch in because they think we’re doing fine now. The wikipedia analogy works well here : it is still fundamental to the way people get information, but it’s chronically understaffed and may already be in a death spiral.
Maybe you’re right. People have less resources and less spare time. Maybe we are fucked, even in the short-mid term. It looks pretty good to me (a lot of big players rely on Linux and core open source infrastructure, open source/self hosted tools are generally recognized as better for the business, we moved out from proprietary standards to open ones, there’s push for interoperability and so on) but maybe there are deeper issues I don’t see and it will all collapse sooner than I think.
oh man while i do love being correct, deep down i hope you’re the one who’s right and i’m overreacting