How To Make Money With Free Software
fons writes "Dutch Python hacker/artist Stani took part in a contest organised by the Dutch Ministry Of Finance to design a 5 euro commemorative coin. And he won, using only free software: 'The whole design was done for 100% with free software. The biggest part consists of custom software in Python, of course within the SPE editor. For the visual power I used PIL and pyCairo. From time to time also Gimp, Inkscape and Phatch helped quite a bit. All the developing and processing was done on GNU/Linux machines which were running Ubuntu/Debian. I would have loved to release the coin under the GPL, which could maybe solve the financial crisis. However for obvious reasons I was not allowed to do that.'"
I would have loved to release the coin under the GPL, which could maybe solve the financial crisis.
... issuing more credit).
Actually, people printing too much money was how this crisis started in the first place.
(and they are going to solve it by
Or the purpose of the article is to bring light to the fact that he won the contest using only FOSS software, and they chose the title of "How to Make Money" as a pun, where you would assume they meant "how to profit", but they literally meant "how to design money".
By what name do you wish to be mourned?
You could have the same title for an article about an author that wrote a book using OpenOffice.
Slashdot actually rejected my submission when I did just that. It's a pity, too; Return of Macbeth is an instant classic.
This guy won due to superior design, not due to the fact that he used free software. The free software is in the background, contributing but almost incidental to the final product. That's how is should be though. Free software released the artist from the constraints of having to fit in with someone else's idea of what software or technology he should be allowed to use, leaving him free to be creative and follow his own unique path.
What's the big deal?
I've seen people recreate entire scenes from "Lost" in MS Paint, but it doesn't mean it's the easier or faster way to do it.
Just means it can be done. I'm not devaluing the work done here, or the benefit of open source software but seriously... I don't see the big deal in this article.
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
00101111 00101110
This guy is a master of symbolic design. He's the modern heir of the artistic geniuses who did all the dense symbolic religious iconography in early christian churches and for secret societies. It's perfectly fitting, since architecture, particularly classical architecture, is loaded with design secrets and hidden meanings, and the coin is about architecture. This coin being loaded with dense symbolism and being about architecture, I hope there's something masonic hidden on it somewhere. I assume the masons were active in The Netherlands?
My question is - did he just use open-source on principle, or did it confer an advantage on doing this project over the commercial alternatives? Or was it harder to do it with the open source software? Clearly it involved a lot of custom scripting. Did he go as far as to look at the source code to accomplish this, or dig into the software in other ways that couldn't be done with closed source? Anybody know?
Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?
...it made me giggle with joy to see the guy mention he won against people using Adobe products. I teach Adobe products to impressionable college students, and when they sign up to take my class and purchase their own copy of Photoshop or Illustrator, boy do they think they have ARRIVED in cool-town. Many of my new students think that once they *understand* how to use Photoshop better than most, they are now a graphic designer, creative person, illustrator, web designer, etc.
So I started doing an extra credit assignment where I tell them they are not allowed to use Adobe products, and they have to design a postcard. They use any package they want; most use GIMP or Inkscape because they're free. Without fail, they come back and say, "hey, I can't do anything with this. It's not Adobe. It sucks." So I point out to them that their Adobe software skills make them think they're pretty good at design. But what happened to their awesome design skills when they started using another software package? Does the software really suck, or do they just hate it because of its non-Adobeness? I show them nicely-done work by other GIMP or Inkscape users. Blank looks. Lesson ensues.
Relying on a specific software package is fine. *Depending* on it is risky. And *not being able* to design using anything else because of some marketing-infused mental block just means you're spoiled and/or ignorant. Bravo for the true creativity displayed in the article.
I've always wanted to work in a mint. And then go on strike. To make less money.
(Not the original quote, and I can't remember who said it originally. But relevant for this context.)
I wank in the shower.
For the humor-impaired, it's a pun:
make (earn) money vs. make (design) money
referring to the often asked question, how do you make money with free software.
get it?
But he was *making money*, get it? Coin - money...
Anyway, the interesting thing here is not that he designed something with free software, people do that all the time, but that his design won. Of course I didn't read the article, but A assume his was not the only entry, and that at least some other entries were prepared with proprietary software.
So it wouldn't be "an author wrote a book using OpenOffice" but rather "a book written using OpenOffice won some prize". Of course books created by free software regularly win top places at typography contests, so it would still not be that unusual.
There is, however, certain feeling among both professionals and public that in the area of graphics design, proprietary software rules, and using free software gives you a serious handicap. That is what makes this interesting.
AccountKiller
The GP makes a post, saying "Fuck Python C# for life!", and you make a post essentially saying "Fuck C#, real languages for life!".
It's a real battle of wits, isn't it?
How dare someone prefer one programming language to another!
I take it you don't know your ASCII table by heart? 00101111 00101110 is far from dead.
Yeah, it's just the kind of petty small-mindedness that I would expect from an emacs user.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
All you need to do is this! Its simple and GUARANTEED to make YOU money! $$$!
Pay me $500 for the right to develop my wonderful ideas, and then just recruit TWO MORE PEOPLE to develop it for you, and promise that they get money! GUARANTEED RESULTS!!!! YOU can make FREE MONEY!! FREEEEEEE!!!!!!
The more talent you have, the less important the tools are.
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
I hear you.
Fuck emacs, vi for life!
and the thoughts that went into it.
I find the design pretty daring and radical. But still, without knowing anything about art or design, I can tell that a lot of thought went into it.
That it's done with free software is ++, and just goes to show how effective it can be, when put into capable hands.
congratulations.
Asked what he was going to do with the award money, the artist said "I'll finally be able to afford Photoshop!" ;)
Sanity is a sandbox. I prefer the swings.
That coin, especially the back, has to be one of the ugliest things I've ever seen.
The distended anus of the child of tubgirl and Rick Astley?
I believe you mean, "Return of the Scottish Character".
...because "hacker" sounds way sexier than "code drone."
He won a design contest, the logical conclusion? He can't design.
Only in Slashdot ...
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
What's the significance of this story supposed to be? People have been designing things without proprietary software for centuries. Ever heard of pencil and paper? I don't see people bragging about using those tools... so what's the big deal if somebody uses Free software to do the same thing?
... and then they built the supercollider.
The same could be said of the designers of the A380 jumbo jet. They could have used a piece of paper and a 6H pencil but they they would have come up against the constraint that it is physically impossible to do the required calculations in a reasonable time. It's why people use automated tools. While not in the same league as an A380, the coin still embodies calculations which are involved enough that they could not be done manually. For example, the calculations involved in rendering the illustration using a variable width font on a curved path. Sure he could have licked his finger, held it up in the wind and guessed at a correct rendering, but he would not have achieved the same effect as he did with the tools he used.
I am a VI user not an Emacs user.
Why? Because emacs often requires installation, where VI is by default on almost every Linux and Unix system, it's also an extended version of "ed" that is a very useful tool.
Anyhow it's not small mindedness, because C# is closed and proprietary it very limited in it use.
For example you will not see developers porting the language to new systems. Only Microsoft can do that!
Hence it's not a real language in that respect.
How about project usage? Can you write an OS with it. Or program set top boxes or other embedded applications?
real languages can go anywhere. it's not some petty personal bias. It's a real fact, C, C++, Forth, Java can be counted on as running on almost even known CPU and hardware device ever developed.
C and Forth are almost university the first languages to run on any CPU!!!
Where C and Forth goes, Python, perl, php, java, pascal and many other languages are easy to port over on top of the C compiler. Except C#, J++ and other proprietary solutions.
Try that with C#. Oh you don't have the language source code... Oooh too bad. You don't have source for all of your libraries or even a clean spec on how things are supposed to work. Oh well call m$ and see if they can help.
vi for life!
see my site http://www.churchofbsd.org/
I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it. - Pablo Picasso
> Java and C# are nearly interchangeable
yes I know.
So then why bother with something closed source?
> Actionscript
This is it's own beast, I'd have the same gripes with flash, except it's getting much more open, and they have done an excellent job for what it is, but it's very limited in it's use again and so it's not a "real language" by my definition.
I am sure there is some compsci student out there that can come up with a better term for it, but it's a Niche Language and as such has limited use.
I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it. - Pablo Picasso
You just got whoooosh'd.
Yeah, Malbolge is the best language ever!
Tordek, Dwarven Warrior - Juegos de Rol en Argentina
Malbolge is a public domain esoteric programming language invented by Ben Olmstead in 1998, named after the eighth circle of hell in Dante's Inferno, the Malebolge.
She made the willows dance
You are comparing apples to oranges here. For a book, content is pretty much all that matters, and a very good book can be written using Notepad. However, designing something in an image manipulation program uses a lot of that program's features, so this program plays an important role in the end product.
So, basically, shovels are better than back hoes because with a shovel you can make both small and big holes, but with back-hoes, you can only make big holes. However, what you aren't taking into account is that while backhoes can't make small holes, they are way more efficient at making big ones.
And just for the record, a "small hole" is a low-level project, such as an operating system, and a "big hole" is a higher-level system, like a software program.
I'm not saying that C# is better than C, just that they have different purposes and are therefore better at different things.
Not sure how serious you were, but I think I can counter.
First, you say that C# is a closed and proprietary language. You also say there is no spec for the C# language. While Microsoft's C# compiler itself may be closed source and proprietary software, it is an open standard per ECMA. You also state that developers won't be porting the language to new systems, yet I can count at least two compilers (both open source) available for non Microsoft systems.
You then ask if it can be used to create an operating system, if it can program set top boxes, or be used in embedded systems. Well, yes (Singularity), eventually (it has been noted that one use of Singularity would be set top boxes) and yes (.NET Compact Framework or Embedded Linux with Mono).
You may state these solutions are inefficient or inadequate, and I won't argue against that. However, to say they don't exist at all is not true.
it's also an extended version of "ed" that is a very useful tool.
Yesterday my Fedora 9 updater told me that I had a security update.
For ed.
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
Stani explained the way he made the coin at a Dutch python user group meeting in Amsterdam. Everyone attending was really enthousiastic about it. http://reinout.vanrees.org/weblog/archive/2008/09/12/python-calculated-coin
Good to see that he's written an article himself with the full explanation and graphs! Nicely done.
Reinout van Rees