Slashdot Mirror

You are right, they might be very smart 12 year old programmers. That's rare as the average age was between 22 and 37 the last time FOSS looked things. Still, I know one very good 13 year old perl guy. In the free software world, what you do and make is more important than where you live or who you are. That's in sharp contrast to the commercial world where turds like Bill Gates had enough money at birth to bully dummies into dumpsters for code or buy it for his vaults.

The statement "Stuart goes on to explode the myth of renegade prgrammers by saying, 'Sure, it represents a new way to create software, but the actual process looks a lot like how enterprise software has been made for decades." Is an interesting turn of events if true. Just a few years ago these were the numbers:

• While 50% were IT professionals, 47% of free programmers expected no financial reward for their work. The overwhelming reason was to gain experience, teach and learn how to do things. The actual motivating factors did not change much between those paid and those not paid to make software.
• 40% spent less than five hours a week on their software. I might spend that much time reading the news.
• Most projects have few members. Not everything is like Mozilla or the Linux kernel. Most don't even have the 90 or so programmers the GNU debugger has. With projects like KDE making it easy to produce beautiful and functional GUI programs, it's likely that more small projects will come into popular use.

The bottom up nature of free software is a very real and welcome departure from "traditional," 1980s, NDA encumbered, commercial software development. While it's great to have companies supporting various projects, I doubt seriously they will be able to match the creativity of the world at large in numbers or range of applications. The best thing that companies can do is to free their people and let them solve their problems as they please. Free software environments are far richer, more pleasing and of higher quality than those put together traditionally. The "renegade" programmer sharing his information and scratching itches is what makes this possible and that's what free software is all about.

The myth discussed in this article is really intended for a bunch of PHBs and people who aren't that technically inclined, who believe that Linux is a toy used by rogue hackers to break into peoples' Windoze boxes and steal their social security numbers...

Well then, I'm not so worried by the DDoS on the article that's kept me from reading it.

You are right, they might be very smart 12 year old programmers. That's rare as the average age was between 22 and 37 the last time FOSS looked things. Still, I know one very good 13 year old perl guy. In the free software world, what you do and make is more important than where you live or who you are. That's in sharp contrast to the commercial world where turds like Bill Gates had enough money at birth to bully dummies into dumpsters for code or buy it for his vaults.

The statement "Stuart goes on to explode the myth of renegade prgrammers by saying, 'Sure, it represents a new way to create software, but the actual process looks a lot like how enterprise software has been made for decades." Is an interesting turn of events if true. Just a few years ago these were the numbers:

• While 50% were IT professionals, 47% of free programmers expected no financial reward for their work. The overwhelming reason was to gain experience, teach and learn how to do things. The actual motivating factors did not change much between those paid and those not paid to make software.
• 40% spent less than five hours a week on their software. I might spend that much time reading the news.
• Most projects have few members. Not everything is like Mozilla or the Linux kernel. Most don't even have the 90 or so programmers the GNU debugger has. With projects like KDE making it easy to produce beautiful and functional GUI programs, it's likely that more small projects will come into popular use.

The bottom up nature of free software is a very real and welcome departure from "traditional," 1980s, NDA encumbered, commercial software development. While it's great to have companies supporting various projects, I doubt seriously they will be able to match the creativity of the world at large in numbers or range of applications. The best thing that companies can do is to free their people and let them solve their problems as they please. Free software environments are far richer, more pleasing and of higher quality than those put together traditionally. The "renegade" programmer sharing his information and scratching itches is what makes this possible and that's what free software is all about.

The myth discussed in this article is really intended for a bunch of PHBs and people who aren't that technically inclined, who believe that Linux is a toy used by rogue hackers to break into peoples' Windoze boxes and steal their social security numbers...

Well then, I'm not so worried by the DDoS on the article that's kept me from reading it.

A more healthy pattern is that of the true innovator who is truly designing something great, but who has no personal resources left over for anything but the work at hand. Every ounce of psychological, emotional and intellectual energy is being consumed in the work itself. Teamwork, in this case, is an insignificant factor to a person immersed in this sort of creative experience.

That's healthy? I prefer not having a job over working for assholes like that. No hobbies, no home life, not a single psychological or emotional ounce left? The free software model, where the most programmers devote less than five hours a week to their projects (see page 3) has been far more productive.

Microsoft would like every company to be so soul sucking. If they were, it would be much harder for people to co-operate with each other and make things work. Hopefully, most companies do not treat their employees like sacrificial animals and realize that people work for a living rather than living to work.

The proposal is at the end of the article, in the "Roadmap for the Future" section...
I question whether you made it that far before deciding to rant.

To Summarize:

• Be people-centric
• Be willing to collaborate
• Create shared language - most important and difficult IMHO
• Keep improving