A New Non-Money Oriented Crowdsourcing Platform Based On Code Contributions (crowdsourcer.io)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

A New Non-Money Oriented Crowdsourcing Platform Based On Code Contributions (crowdsourcer.io)

Posted by EditorDavid on Sunday August 27, 2017 @04:34AM from the sudo-create dept.

An anonymous reader shares a new crowdfunding site built on open source principles to "remove the money element from project creation" so creators "don't have to take extreme actions such as quitting their jobs or compromising on their ideas because of investor demands. Because of the nature of crowdsourcer.io projects, project creators can remain as ambitious as funded projects and get all the contributors they need to make their idea a reality."

From the site: Crowdsourcer.io is an alternative crowd sourcing platform that allows developers and designers alike to create or join in on software related projects, build up their contribution and earn an income from the final product. Think of Crowdsourcer.io as something between open source software creation and Kickstarter start ups, a new crowd sourcing alternative, in its purest form"
The site's creator recently answered questions on Reddit, saying they'd spent years fine-tuning the idea, and writing that "It's really focussed on people who don't want to quit their job to form their own software company, and don't want to become embroiled in debt or other financing." A note at the bottom of the site adds that "Crowdsourcer.io is young. We want your ideas!"

84 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Free Open Source by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 04:40 · Score: 0

The success of Open Source is all based on not paying money.
"Pay them less to do more with less."
1. Re:Free Open Source by jellomizer · 2017-08-27 05:00 · Score: 0
  
  The dollar is good for all debts public and private.
  Bartering your services as payment means you may not have the skills that a particular project needs.
  Paying means you can hire staff to do the work even if it isn't a project they personally want or need.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
2. Re:Free Open Source by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 07:39 · Score: 0
  
  The success of Open Source is all based on not paying money.
  "Pay them less to do more with less."
  FOSS has always been a money game. I spend most of my time developing FOSS software and being paid by a company which needs the result. One of the earliest companies to make money from FOSS, Aladdin used the limits of the GPL to get money from Ghostscript whilst at the same time releasing it as Free software (this is one of the reasons most commercially successful FOSS software has been GPL licensed). The majority of Linux contributions come from RedHat, a company which earns literally billions of dollars yearly from servicing FOSS (like really true literal actually a fact literal, not like emphasis of something that isn't true). The majority of money in software has always been spent on maintaining and fixing existing systems already in use. FOSS just makes that even clearer.
  You should think of free (as in beer) use of free (as in liberty) software as a loss leader which lets you be sure that it suits your needs before you use it for real. You may end up paying less for it in the long run, but it's more likely that you actually end up getting much more from it than the proprietary alternative and paying a bit more because you get more involved.
3. Re:Free Open Source by Errol+backfiring · 2017-08-28 01:21 · Score: 1
  
  The dollar is good for all debts public and private.
  That may be true, but the bail-outs learn us that your dollar is good for someone else's debts. Cutting out the evil middle men can only improve the situation.
  
  --
  Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
4. Re:Free Open Source by jellomizer · 2017-08-29 03:38 · Score: 1
  
  I guess you got the Cable News lesson.
  The Bail out had saved ourselves in spite of our personal feelings about it. The problem was the banks took on risky loans with a mechanism that allowed to reduce the risk of loaning out to the individual loan. Your sub prime loan being split to a hundred lenders means if you had individually failed. The cost of failure will be small amounts across a lot of companies. So just as long only small number of people fail on their loans things are all good, Being that everyone individual risk is lowered the total risk is lowered thus allowing to offer a cheaper loan to a higher risk individual. Cheaper loans allows under privledge people to buy homes for the first time and begin to break out of poverty cycle, as they will have an investment to fall back on.
  So giving cheap loans to poor people to make a normally solid investment is a good thing.
  However the crux was the adjustable rate. Normally this would be fine, as they will normally make more money in the future to match the change in rate, but the rate jumped up with the increase demand. So a lot of people couldn't afford their loans any more and had stopped paying. Causing all the problems.
  By no means the banks were innocent. They did a lot of bad things that they should had realized was bad, just to make the quarterly profit. However the line between good and evil is drawn after the outcome is written.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
So.... by phantomfive · 2017-08-27 04:46 · Score: 1

So I can write code for someone who has a startup, and then they get all the profits? No thanks, that's why (one reason why) I use the GPL.

--
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
1. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 05:03 · Score: 1
  
  that's why (one reason why) I use the GPL.
  If you use GPL software written by someone else, you are using their free labor to profit yourself. If you use GPL in software you write, you are doing free labor to create profit for someone else. So you're doing the same thing as the startup you're criticizing.
2. Re:So.... by phantomfive · 2017-08-27 05:13 · Score: 1
  
  Nope. If I use GPL software, I return any changes I make back to the world. That is the agreement. With this project, you give them your code, and that's it.
  With kickstarter, you can donate a small amount, like $25. WIth code, $25 will buy you almost nothing.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
3. Re: So.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 05:24 · Score: 0
  
  His comment just goes to show how the GPL and its supporters don't care about freedom. In fact, like his comment shows, they want the opposite: to control how others use, distribute and modify the code in question. That's not freedom! If someone is going to have that attitude, well, they might as well not even bother releasing their source code. Just release binaries under a proprietary license. That will give them more of the control they so desperately want.
4. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 05:31 · Score: 0
  
  You don't understand what commons are. Using a common good is not the same as appropriating it. Appropriating would mean expropriating from everyone else and this is what the GPL is intended to prevent.
5. Re:So.... by FudRucker · 2017-08-27 05:32 · Score: 1
  
  25 bucks can almost fill my gas tank, or buy enough groceries to last a week if i am frugal
  
  --
  Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
6. Re: So.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 05:33 · Score: 0
  
  If I use GPL software, I return any changes I make back to the world.
  That's just a form of virtue-signalling, really. Your changes still end up forcibly released under the strict, inflexible, and onerous terms of the GPL, making them unusable to pretty much everyone. You get to pretend that you support 'freedom' and 'openness', but you and the GPL hypocritically prevent the genuine, unrestricted freedom that would allow others to use this code however they want.
  Free, libre, open source software isn't about telling people how they can use code you wrote or modified. It's the exact opposite. It's about people using code however they want. The GPL is just too freedom-restricting.
7. Re: So.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 05:40 · Score: 0
  
  What nonsense! Software can't be 'appropriated'. Somebody modifying their copy of source code doesn't affect my copy of that same source code!
  Say I have a copy of the FreeBSD source code. If some company uses the same code, extends it, and releases their own OS, it has absolutely no effect on my ability to use the source code I have.
  The only depravation going on are the restrictions on freedom imposed by the GPL. These aren't even imposed in any real, tangible sense. They're imposed through legal handwaving.
8. Re: So.... by phantomfive · 2017-08-27 05:45 · Score: 1
  
  What virtue am I signaling? I don't need virtue.
  
  The GPL is making a deal: you can get my work without money, by exchanging it for any additions you make. (If you want to pay for it, that's possible too).
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
9. Re: So.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 06:19 · Score: 0
  
  -Posted from an Android device.
10. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 06:35 · Score: 0
  
  You're right, it has to settle these problems. I've had this idea for the longest time and only in the last few months worked out the details you're talking about. In fact, seeing this story gives me that creepy feeling someone has been following me around "stealing" my ideas. Funny how people come up with the same things at the same time, must be in the social consciousness. However, I suppose it was inevitable this would come up around now, now that the obviousness of how bankrupt the gig economy is as an economic vehicle.
11. Re:So.... by phantomfive · 2017-08-27 07:00 · Score: 1
  
  I've had this idea for the longest time and only in the last few months worked out the details you're talking about.
  
  Well then, ok, how did you work them out?
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
12. Re:So.... by alvinrod · 2017-08-27 07:05 · Score: 2
  
  You don't need to make modifications to GPL software to make use of it. Someone could conceivably use GIMP to make money by selling the work they create using it or hiring out their labor to others who want something created. Hell, you could run a huge business and use LibreOffice instead of Word and never contribute back to it. I think that's what the previous poster was getting at.
13. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 07:28 · Score: 0
  
  Yea well, that's the secret sauce isn't it? I've got a secret, I've got a secret!
14. Re: So.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 07:49 · Score: 0
  
  What virtue am I signaling? I don't need virtue.
  The GPL is making a deal: you can get my work without money, by exchanging it for any additions you make. (If you want to pay for it, that's possible too).
  More than that. The (A)GPL leaves open other deals, like "you give me a ton of your money and I'll let you use the code in your secret stuff". Amazon has recently shown that if you put out code under other licenses, you will end up the sucker as they make all the money from you.
  And I really do mean the AGPLv3. MySQL was under the GPL and they still took it and closed it into Aurora. If you want to keep your code going forward then chose a modern web oriented GPL variant.
15. Re: So.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 07:54 · Score: 0
  
  The problem of BSD licensing, which GPL aims to solve, is selfish people make useful changes and refuse to contribute back to the community. I see this sort of thing happen with GPL violators who openly abuse small projects. They take an existing open source code base, add features, brag about having added features, give copies to their friends, and deny requests for their modified source code to be made public. On a small scale these GPL violators are not worth suing, so they do whatever they want. Yet the unfortunate consequence is GPL violators have a chilling effect on contributors who see their contributions exploited.
16. Re:So.... by Gr8Apes · 2017-08-27 08:07 · Score: 1
  
  Using GIMP to create something is owned by whomever creates it. Modifying GIMP so it is useful means no one owns the modification, provided you are attempting to distribute the modification. If you keep it in house, then it's no problem.
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
17. Re: So.... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 08:11 · Score: 0
  
  gpl is fine.. Agpl is BAD. it forces attribution and source links to *everybody*, including the untrustworthy public. that is a security risk not worth taking. do not make the hackers job any easier by giving them your fucking source and exact version number(s) of software you're using for your online site or service.
  whats even worse, non-"asp" projects are also using it.. it's some sort of new fad. it's HORRIBLE. QUIT USING THE FUCKING THING. affero. is. a. horrible. idea. created by someone who must have got butthurt over not getting the source code to a web site they once used.
  attribution goes in source, not in public web output that isn't restricted to only the site owner.
18. Re:So.... by tottenham18 · 2017-08-27 18:31 · Score: 1
  
  Hi,
  
  I created the site. Just wanted to clarify, that unlike with real startups, you'll be getting a share of the profits of all sales. They're split up based off of contribution and distributed in the same way to all members of the project, whether they're a contributor or the creator of a project. That's quite literally the entire point of the site! I don't know if it's the wording of the article or the site, but I definitely need to clear this up. Seems like it's been misinterpreted a little.
19. Re: So.... by david_thornley · 2017-08-28 09:48 · Score: 1
  
  Is that a violation? If I take a GPLed project, make changes, and give the improved version to some friends, then my friends have to be able to get the source, and they're free to redistribute under the GPL terms. You have no right to get a copy of the binary, and therefore no right to get a copy of the source.
  
  --
  "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
"based on code contributions" by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 04:51 · Score: 0

Uh oh. Right. "Based on code contributions" . . . for how long?
The SJWs have been infiltrating all the OSS groups and turning "meritocracy" into "oppression/racism/sexism/homphobia/transphobia" and pushing diversity and nice-warm-feelings-about-yourself over actual quality of your code and other ways you contribute to a project.
Frankly, given how widespread it is at this point, I don't feel comfortable contributing *anything* to pretty much *any* OSS project. Everyone has just handed them all over to these whiny do-nothings. If you don't respect what you're doing enough to keep them from taking over, why should I care enough about what you're doing?
1. Re:"based on code contributions" by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 05:28 · Score: 0
  
  Let's be honest. You've never contributed and you never planned on it. You didn't really need an excuse here.
2. Re:"based on code contributions" by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 05:36 · Score: 0
  
  Since the rise of social media, open source projects have become social clubs primarily. I'm not interested in the focus on social participation, so I don't put my name on contributions anymore. I only contribute reluctantly under pseudonyms. On the rare occasion when my enthusiasm overwhelms my reticence, then I might submit a patch or two, but otherwise I keep my code changes to myself.
3. Re:"based on code contributions" by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 05:38 · Score: 0
  
  No you don't. You don't do any of that, because it's what a crazy person would do. You probably don't even know how to code.
4. Re:"based on code contributions" by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 06:20 · Score: 0
  
  Let's play bait the AC into linking to a github profile.
5. Re:"based on code contributions" by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 06:22 · Score: 0
  
  Let's play bait-the-AC into linking to a github profile.
6. Re: "based on code contributions" by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 08:11 · Score: 0
  
  You said "to code". PHB detected!
7. Re:"based on code contributions" by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 08:57 · Score: 0
  
  You are clearly new to the OSS group. What you call SJW is how smart people treat each other so as not to cause unnecessary stress on everybody. Every OSS project I've worked on has been filled with these people, and the ones who stalk around calling everyone "n*ggers" and "k*kes" are the ones who get the boot. Even a contributor who really IS a racist piece of shit should have the sense to not let it be known they are a racist piece of shit if they want to be involved in the community. Luckily the right wing has distanced itself so far from STEM fields due to an indoctrinated fear of education that it's not much of a worry anymore.
8. Re: "based on code contributions" by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 10:14 · Score: 0
  
  I can link to GitHub right now. Doesn't mean I have any affiliation.
9. Re:"based on code contributions" by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 10:51 · Score: 0
  
  Let's pick a random Rust-Lang douche. Technically speaking, they've never contributed either.
Quit a job? by DogDude · 2017-08-27 04:56 · Score: 1

Software development is a great place to be today: It pays well, jobs are plentiful, and anybody can learn to program, for free, in their spare time. I learned to program, and created my own applications on my own, in my free time, while I was gainfully employed doming something unrelated. It cost me $0. Why do people today need millions of dollars and thousands of hours of uninterrupted (otherwise unemployed) time to program?

--
I don't respond to AC's.
1. Re:Quit a job? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 05:09 · Score: 0
  
  Software development is a great place to be today: It pays well, jobs are plentiful,
  Only if you're under 30 and you're a cultural fit for bro culture, dude.
2. Re:Quit a job? by jeff4747 · 2017-08-27 05:43 · Score: 1
  
  Why do people today need millions of dollars and thousands of hours of uninterrupted (otherwise unemployed) time to program?
  Because all but the most trivial problems require a lot of time to write all the code to make it work. You can do it nights and weekends if you don't mind taking so long that your solution becomes moot by the time it's ready.
3. Re: Quit a job? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 05:44 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah ok. Making a simple iPhone app that there are a dozen similar apps already is one thing - you could do that in a weekend by yourself I suppose.
  Now translate that into writing an accounting platform that generates invoices based on business logic derived from contracts, has to follow GAAP rules, keep customer data secure, integrate with three different banking institutions for ACH payments, ETL's reporting data to other systems for the business, accepts incoming SQL data by the gigabyte in order to accrue accounts, imports legacy billing data by OCR reading of PDF files from the shitty third-party billing provider you are replacing, and has a nice pretty customer portal that integrates with a pre-existing authentication system so that customers can get their invoices, and pay their bills. Oh, and make it scale to not gag under its own weight when it has to chunk out 300,000 invoices.
  And then QA the whole thing, because if you fuck it up, it's the front page of the Wall Street Journal.
  Just go ahead and whip that up in your spare time while doing whatever the fuck you call a day job. Some things are bigger than your tie-together-some-JavaScript-libraries-and-ship-it app development.
4. Re:Quit a job? by Sarten-X · 2017-08-27 05:54 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Why do people today need millions of dollars and thousands of hours of uninterrupted (otherwise unemployed) time to program?
  Market standards.
  When I wrote my first released software, a good idea and a few hundred lines of code would be sufficient to get a customer base, because the odds were good that it was a unique new tool that helped somebody.
  Now, to even get customers to try a product, it has to have a good website, professionally-designed interface, and be significantly better in some way than the dozen other equivalent tools available. All of that polish takes time, and if you're working on a spare-time basis, that means it takes a scale of years to produce a viable product. During that time, technology still changes, and that promising library that saved so much time is now obsolete and considered a security risk. Updating the product is possible, but it takes more time, and that means more risk. Finally, when the product is viable, it has to compete with an offering from a bigger company with an established revenue stream.
  I don't mean to imply that it's impossible to succeed with spare-time projects, but it is more difficult now than even ten years ago. Software has moved from being a few amusements and office tools to a mature industry driving the majority of our civilization. There's competition out there for most of the current generation of ideas, where there simply wasn't before.
  
  --
  You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
5. Re:Quit a job? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 06:04 · Score: 0
  
  Everyone on my real-life team gets paid real-life money to build real-life software and we're all over 30.
6. Re:Quit a job? by pauljlucas · 2017-08-27 06:11 · Score: 1
  
  Well, no, not anyone can learn to program. It requires the right aptitude. (There are people who, for example, simply can not understand pointers.) Many of those who aren't aware they don't have the requisite aptitude are the ones spending the money on boot camps and such.
  
  --
  If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
7. Re:Quit a job? by nitehawk214 · 2017-08-27 06:21 · Score: 1
  
  As someone that has been doing the job for over 20 years... maybe. When I joined in the late 90s people were so desperate for programmers that the vast majority had no degree or a degree in nuclear or chemical engineering or some other scientific field. (Nuclear was popular since so many people went into that in the 80's and TMI basically fucked everyone that graduated in the 80s and 90s with a Nuclear engineering degree.)
  Today, not so much. If you are 20 years old with absolutely no experience or formal education whatsoever you wont even get a look from a corporation (but a person like this really doesn't want to work for a corporation, they suck). From a small company like mine, you better have one hell of a portfolio project to show off. And I can say that in all of my years, the only people that had impressive portfolio projects also had good degrees and/or lots of experience.
  Now, I am not saying it is impossible to be successful this way, but this is not 1999 anymore. Getting a perfect programming job with no qualifications would be like saying "I won the lottery, so that should be your plan for success too!"
  Now for people a bit older looking for better employment by learning to program... well... unless you are at a company willing to train it is going to be a tough battle. Companies don't want 30+ year old programmers with zero experience... unless they are willing to work for the salary that a 20 year old would accept.
  Basically, only go into programming if you really enjoy it. I have had people in interviews answer the question "So, why did you go into this career / this type of programming." with the answer "For the money." I hired exactly 0 of those people.Though none of them were terribly impressive anyhow.
  Felt bad for the one guy 10 years older than me that was trying to switch from COBOL to Java but clearly had no idea how to deal with an object oriented language. I have no advice to help this situation.
  
  --
  I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
8. Re:Quit a job? by nitehawk214 · 2017-08-27 06:22 · Score: 1
  
  Also as far as "anybody can learn to program" goes.... No. Clearly not anyone can do the job, otherwise we wouldn't have so much shitty code out there. :)
  
  --
  I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
9. Re:Quit a job? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 06:22 · Score: 0
  
  Have you tried looking at companies that don't suck? I'm making a good living doing software development, and I'm over 40. I had a coworker at my last job who was old enough that he'd programmed with punch cards back in the day, and he was still getting paid as a software developer (writing computer games!); I've had a number of female coworkers as well, and my current company is 50% female. The bro culture exists at some places, but certainly not all.
10. Re: Quit a job? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 06:23 · Score: 0
  
  So you wanted to release your program and then never update that outdated security risk library after the fact. Got it.
11. Re:Quit a job? by nitehawk214 · 2017-08-27 06:33 · Score: 1
  
  That line makes me thing he is an idiot or trolling or has never actually done anything bigger than a shell script or thinks html is a programming language.
  Reminds me of the "Why should I pay you money to develop the application? My nephew Vinny has a Tandy and can bang this out in a weekend!" mentality that was prevalent in the 90s. Managers generally thought programmers were worthless because "anybody can sit at a desk and bang on a keybaord all day."
  
  --
  I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
12. Re: Quit a job? by Sarten-X · 2017-08-27 06:40 · Score: 1
  
  What would be preferable would be to release the product before the library is obsolete, then have a revenue stream to support an ongoing update schedule to resolve problems as they're found, rather than as spare time permits.
  
  --
  You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
13. Re:Quit a job? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 06:58 · Score: 0
  
  From a small company like mine, you better have one hell of a portfolio project to show off.
  
  Well that's a blatant lie.
  One time as an interviewer was rejecting me, he told me I should put a portfolio project on my resume. OK, I can take advice, so since then I put on the resume a sizable project which I spent a few years working on, all my own work, fully documented and coded full of comments. The number of times that project has gotten me a job is the number zero. Usually the project is ignored entirely. Occasionally some idiot looks at the title and says, "I've never heard of this project."
  No thanks for the bad advice, liar.
14. Re:Quit a job? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 07:53 · Score: 0
  
  There are people who, for example, simply can not understand pointers.
  Objectively, I know this is true because I have seen programmers not understanding pointers. However, Pointers are, in the end, just things that point a things. Like signs, or like arrows. Or like postal addresses (ZIP + number). Can you please explain how people can be not able to understand that?
15. Re: Quit a job? by Reverend+Green · 2017-08-27 08:13 · Score: 1
  
  Meet the new boss - same as the old boss.
16. Re:Quit a job? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 09:36 · Score: 0
  
  If you can get an answer to that question, you might have a future as a programming instructor.
17. Re: Quit a job? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 14:12 · Score: 0
  
  Actually, the programmers are okay, it's just that we have to use open source software in our projects or we're not being "resourceful". The OSS comes from some 12 year old in the basement in a third world country.
  So quality drops or you...uh...get fired.
18. Re:Quit a job? by ichimunki · 2017-08-28 04:20 · Score: 1
  
  There are people who can't learn lots of things... but any college graduate can probably learn to do the bulk of what passes for programming in the places I've worked. And I've seen lots of shitty development from people with CSci degrees (sometimes even Master's), who presumably had to pass a course in college where pointers were covered.
  
  --
  I do not have a signature
Hipster reinvents Free Software Foundation by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 05:03 · Score: 0

So innovative, dudebro. /s
We already have SourceForge... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 05:04 · Score: 0

Wtf?
1. Re:We already have SourceForge... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 05:14 · Score: 0
  
  If you have a SourceForge account, you're an old has-been.
  If you have both a SourceForge account and a GitHub account, you're an old washed-up has-been desperately trying to look relevant.
2. Re:We already have SourceForge... by phantomfive · 2017-08-27 06:01 · Score: 1
  
  And that's exactly why I prefer source forge........to stay away from haters like you.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
This is a bad omen by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 05:06 · Score: 0

Did you see where they are located?
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6224574,-111.1600475,22m/data=!3m1!1e3
I've been there before.
And I'm not going back.
Something smells funny over there by CustomSolvers2 · 2017-08-27 05:39 · Score: 0

...everyone earning contribution points as they complete tasks. There are voting options and rights that come with additional contribution points which makes all the projects completely autonomous (I hope). The best part though is that by using the selling tools I want to provide, any software created with Crowdsourcer.io will be able to sell on a store (yet to be built), via its own websites and maybe even through third party retailers, with 100% of the profit being distributed to a project’s contributors...
It seems that these ideas can be summarised into the following 3 groups of people:

-idea-people-1 (owners of the site).
They provide: the idea (which took years to be formed!) and the site.
They get: upto 10% of the money generated by the future sales of the future applications in the future shop. Until reaching that point, I guess that they will be spending the money given by some VC (most likely, already used for the promotion so far), various $ millions probably.

- Idea-people-2 (project/future-apps owners).
They provide: the idea for the app/code.
They get: the code written for free and the app ready to be sold + 90% of the generated money (by the future sales, etc.).

- Programmers.
They provide: all the code + having everything ready for the future sales.
They get: contributor points, being told that all this is for their own good and this warm feeling of having helped the aforementioned two groups of people to get money from virtually anything.

Is it just me or is there something here that isn't exactly right? Open-source code as a way to share work/knowledge with other people performing equivalent work and having similar knowledge, who might be getting some profit from selling the outputs of that effort, seems OK to me. Assuming that contributors to bigger/more demanding projects are likely to be more knowledgeable and, consequently, that fact being some kind of badge of honour helping these people to find better jobs in the industry seems also fine. Even sharing some code as a way to help others know better about your programming skills seems perfectly acceptable (I do that and give all my code as public domain as far as all what I want is to show my programming skills to future employers; although I am starting to think that almost nobody cares about the code, but about either stars or ready-to-be-used outputs). But at what point have people with low-to-no-knowledge (or, at least, no interest in doing any work) decided that they can get money from others' specialised expertise on exchange of "points"?!

At what point the next logical step after "I need a piece of software + don't have knowledge/am not willing to do it myself" changed from "I would have to hire someone" to "I would get it for free"?! Rather than investing money on having a proper product, you try to get the product for free and invest all the money in promotion and disproportionate salaries?! How can such a nonsensical situation even exist? Might any of this be perhaps related to the increasingly number of errors, problems, bugs, low-quality software everywhere? The most incredible part is that such an approach is starting to become not just acceptable, but required! I have to spend an important amount of time saying that I am a programmer, that I do all the work myself, that the product of my company is my own work! Because having a software development company isn't associated anymore with actually developing software ?! I personally wouldn't mind to share fair parts of my benefits with those providing me with what I am naturally bad at (= getting clients interested in what I develop); but it seems that the overall behaviour is expecting even more?! Me working for nothing?! I will never do such a thing! I work for free a lot but only for me! Who is enabling these disproportionate expectations where those having nothing are seriously thinking that are in control?! Well, my ideas are clear and I can be really patient; if I have to wait for this weird world (of software development) to completely crash, I would do it :)

--
Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
1. Re:Something smells funny over there by CustomSolvers2 · 2017-08-27 05:52 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  The last part of the quote (from Reddit) which got cut: "...At the moment I’m hoping that on every sale there’ll be a cut of about 10% before transaction costs so that 90% of all sales revenue is going to the project contributors - with no extra, hidden costs. This could change though, depending on costs.".
  
  --
  Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
2. Re:Something smells funny over there by nitehawk214 · 2017-08-27 06:37 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, this reminds of the "idea people" that I thought were weeded out of existence years ago.
  "I have this great idea for an app but I know nothing about programming or the software industry. I want you to write the whole thing do all the engineering and testing and I will only pay you if we make money. But don't worry, I will make tons of money. Err, I mean WE will make tons of money. I totally don't plan on cutting you lose as soon as the cash starts rolling in. Also my idea is totally not illegal/trivial/already been done. Trust me, kid, we are gonna go far!"
  
  --
  I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
3. Re:Something smells funny over there by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 07:26 · Score: 0
  
  Dammit, all my IDEAS are ILLEGAL. Hmm, maybe I could sell DRONES in AFRICA. They don't have LAWS in AFRICA, right?
4. Re:Something smells funny over there by tottenham18 · 2017-08-27 18:25 · Score: 2
  
  Hi, I'm the creator of the site, and submitted the original anonymous article to slashdot. You've got some fascinating ideas, and I love your cynicism. I just wanted to correct some things. The contribution points are distributed to all members of a project, including the creator and all the profits are distributed to every member of the project based of the weight of their C.pts, not "this warm feeling of having helped the aforementioned two groups of people to get money from virtually anything". The second is "I guess that they will be spending the money given by some VC (most likely, already used for the promotion so far), various $ millions probably". I've spent £600 so far to get the branding done and the rest has been built by myself in my spare time. I managed to get a grant from the government, but I don't see a penny, I get 40 hours of advice from experts (been really helpful so far). I've actively denied going to financing experts as getting an investment would go against absolutely everything the site holds itself to. I know it may take some convincing, and it's impossible for me to ask any one to trust that I built this on very strong political & economic principles, but this site is absolutely not designed to take people's money/time and give it to other people. It's actually the complete opposite. People will only be paid if they contribute something tangible to the project. So managers and directors who get a large share of something for just managing will find they have a reduced earning potential here. Everyone who contributes an hour of their time, whether they're the creator or a contributor or whatever, will earn the same amount for that hour of time. Anyway, if people want to know any more or have their suspicions, please feel free to chat to me about it.https://developers.slashdot.org/story/17/08/27/0639253/a-new-non-money-oriented-crowdsourcing-platform-based-on-code-contributions#
5. Re:Something smells funny over there by CustomSolvers2 · 2017-08-27 20:26 · Score: 2
  
  I'm the creator of the site
  A true honour and I am not being sarcastic. This is one of the aspects which I love of Slashdot: you can get involved in this kind of situations!
  
  I love your cynicism
  I am not cynical. I am absolutely and completely realistic on account of all my experiences on this front. But you don't need to take my experience to get a proper feeling about all this, you might just take a look at the last quite a few revolutionary app, site, whatever posted here, their actual content (beyond a poorly thought idea), the involved funding (quite a few millions) and how everything ends. You can even start a programming chat here with almost anyone and see the knowledge/reactions/contributions of the younger members. You can start visiting (newer) open-source projects, check their chats and the problems they have (mostly not related at all with technical aspects). You can do some research about how developers are being hired, what is the background of decision makers (and what aspects are really being weighted to make the final decisions), etc.
  
  distributed to all members of a project, including the creator and all the profits are distributed to every member of the project based of the weight of their C.pts
  In principle, it sounds much fairer that my initial assumption (sorry for the having shared inaccurate information). On the other hand, ideas on these lines are usually being sold as fair, because this is precisely the bait to attract free workforce. The first question coming to my mind is: how are you planning to perform such a distribution? How can you assess the relevancy of each contribution (across the huge number of different programming languages which I presume that you will be supporting)? How can you avoid people to trying to trick the system by performing lots of irrelevant commits? I will answer it for you (if you were still thinking about it, here you have your options): you can either try to come up with a pretty complex (even just for one single programming language) application which is likely to be eventually tricked or you can rely on people assessing that issue like moderators. Whatever option you choose, at the end, you will almost certainly end relying on these moderators; probably to be the ones who firstly initiated the project and consequently this would be a sub-set of idea-people-1 (or a new subset which you might call idea-people-1-b whose position would be pretty similar to those). Even if this assessment wouldn’t be required, pushy mobs/factions/bros would eventually appear and relegate actual knowledge/objectivity to a secondary position by converting them liking you/arbitrarily deciding your contribution into the only relevant factor. Any of these versions have nothing to do with actual software development, objectiveness, sharing among knowledgeable and for the knowledge; all of this has to do with people with no knowledge (or not willing to use it) expecting to get some gain from others' knowledge by basically relying on an arbitrary assessment system not based on actual merits (or payments). Basically, idea people providing ideas (impositions, arbitrary decisions, etc.) milking knowledgeable people. So, I am afraid that what your system is essentially linked to (any version of what) I described.
  
  I've spent £600 so far to get the branding done and the rest has been built by myself in my spare time
  If this was true, it would be excellent news and a very much appreciated fresh air in the industry (and again I would have to apologise about my inaccurate random guess). Although honestly, it seems kind of hard to believe that you can get so much visibility (lots of shares in Reddit), being posted here, etc. for so little. On the other hand, you might be good at social networking (one of my weakest points) and it might be possible.
  
  I've actively denied going to financing experts
  
  --
  Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
6. Re:Something smells funny over there by CustomSolvers2 · 2017-08-27 20:44 · Score: 1
  
  weeded out of existence years ago
  ?! They are everywhere and will never go away. In fact, the huge amount of money + relatively easily availability of resources in software development have precisely provoked them to be the new normal. This is basically what non-technical management, recruiters, sales, marketing, etc. become when expecting their low-to-knowledge to be imposed when dealing with technical aspects. This is the kind of people providing all the funding + getting it; that's why a big proportion of the last trendy products/companies are promoted and managed by these individuals. The whole software development reality is slowly becoming an idea-people reality. The logical evolution isn't aspiring to become a better developer anymore, but moving up to idea person (who can say that has a programming background). They (in the widest version of the idea which I am depicting) are certainly required, but there should be a much clearer separation than what is quite common lately.
  
  --
  Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
7. Re:Something smells funny over there by tottenham18 · 2017-08-27 21:29 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Thank you so much for the detailed response. It makes me so happy to hear that you're so up for a discussion and aren't ready to just right it off without a giving it (and me) a chance.
  
  Let me first address your questions on the practical features of the site which contribute to making it a fair workplace. And then maybe if I can allay some of those concerns, I can talk about why I genuinely believe it can create a change in the industry even though I know all too well the exploitation of workforce by the largest and most powerful in the industry. I've spent years coming up with solutions to the problems you're thinking about, so even though it may seem like the site has tonnes of flaws, it's my job now to show you that I've likely had the same issues with it as you and have come up with some way of tackling it.
  
  So first things first.
  
  How can you assess the relevancy of each contribution (across the huge number of different programming languages which I presume that you will be supporting)?
  Simply put, we advise creators to come up with a system for allocating cpts. The default suggestion is one hour of work equates to 1cpt, irrespective of what that hour was doing. Creators and task editors can come up with any scale they like, as long as it remains consistent across all positions and throughout the life of the project
  
  How can you avoid people to trying to trick the system by performing lots of irrelevant commits?
  Actual commits bear no relevance to the system. Everything is done through project tasks. Tasks are created based on position and have a cpt associated with them. Anyone in that position can accept it (provided they've not undertaken too many tasks) and anyone in the project with a threshold level of cpts can create new ones. Should a task be completed, under certain circumstances it can go into review in which case it can be voted on by anyone in the project over a certain threshold of c.pts (not the same threshold as task management, though all thresholds can be changed by project owners). So simply put, I've built projects in such a way that they're autonomous. They can't easily be hijacked by random people but likewise there can't be a dictatorship by the project owner. The balance of power of course, was the largest thing I had to solve. Also this might also begin to draw a bigger picture of how it'll be hard for venture capitalists or work exploiters to take advantage of the system. The whole site involves a two way relationship throughout. Both sides have to realise that this system is only going to work for them if they don't try to rip each other off. That's quite literally the only way projects on CSio won't fall into mayhem.
  
  how are you planning to perform such a distribution?
  Which brings me on to the last point of the mechanics. We're providing a store for our users + selling tools to sell on their own sites & third party retailers (though the technical side of that is a little off implementation). All the money gets distributed straight away to all the contributors. If the project creator hasn't pulled their weight (or anyone for that matter) then they're going to earn less than those who've dedicated lots of time. That's the mentality we want people to have. And sure there are going to be issues internally; what if the project creator feels like the project is being swept away from under him and gets jealous/spiteful? What if the project creator is a bit of a tool and annoys all his contributors? These are people problems, and people problems can't be solved. Lastly this also begins to tackle the issue of requiring money to be seen in the market. Something a bit like watch itch.io does for games, by providing them a store and tools to advertise themselves without fighting head on with the largest stores with the largest marketing budgets. We're creating our own ecosystem where money is not necessary and - if we stay true to our values - never will be
8. Re:Something smells funny over there by CustomSolvers2 · 2017-08-27 22:14 · Score: 1
  
  Thank you so much for the detailed response. It makes me so happy to hear that you're so up for a discussion and aren't ready to just right it off without a giving it (and me) a chance.
  This sounds as an excellent starting point. For me, this is more than enough to assume that you have the right mindset and that I might have unfairly misjudged your attempt.
  
  Simply put, we advise creators to come up with a system for allocating cpts.
  Well, basically it does sound as the moderator-based system with the not-too-positive addition of being a mere recommendation. If you want to make sure that things will certainly be going in the right direction, you would have to set up some basic rules which will have to always be observed.
  
  Everything is done through project tasks. Tasks are created based on position and have a cpt associated with them. Anyone in that position can accept it (provided they've not undertaken too many tasks) and anyone in the project with a threshold level of cpts can create new ones.
  The concept of task seems interesting, but at the end it is still linked to the same arbitrariness. Another thing would be setting up global rules being applied throughout the whole site (even perhaps with different versions for different languages/frameworks). This would be more work for you, but also higher value for your idea and much higher chances of coming up with a fair approach. If you allow performing as many local redefinitions of fairness as required you would be heading directly towards unfairness. What about something like this: you create a set of template groups of tasks (+ for each language); each project has to define some tasks by following any of those templates; you would have to approve all the tasks. Example: task template IO 0 reading/writing from/to files, get 3-10 points * relevance of project; person1 in project1 submits task 1 "implementing our I/O system" applying the template IO 0 with 5 points defined by... + you approve/deny it + every contributor to that project taking care of that task will get 5 points times the size of the project. Fair, square with minimal arbitrariness (or, at least, same arbitrariness for all the projects and contributors).
  
  which case it can be voted on by anyone
  Standard voting systems have proven to be heavily misused almost everywhere. In fact, one of the few voting systems which I kind of like is the Slashdot one and it isn't precisely perfect; but I think that its defining features are very worthy: people randomly selected to vote, restricted conditions under which the votes can be issued, limited number of votes per account. As above, the lower number of power instances, the better. A centralised, fair government whose decisions, which everyone has to accept, define the whole system sounds to me as the only acceptable approach to avoid all the problems which I described in my previous comment.
  
  The balance of power of course, was the largest thing I had to solve
  What about my proposal above? Accepting the reality seems to mean that you cannot grant unlimited powers/freedom to random people online because it is likely to provoke lots of unfairness. If you are really up for changing things and you are really committed to your project, why not doing some serious centralising work on the lines on what I am proposing above, something fair and rigorous enough?
  
  idea-people have some desire to maintain the power of their projects or that they have a desire to exploit work because they don't have knowledge. Well the simple solution is, those kind of people don't have a space on this site one bit
  This is the way to go: clear rules to be applied no matter what whose sole purpose is to fulfil the intended goal under the intended conditions. Your site/approach has to undoubtedly define those and to provide the tools to ensure their observance. You can
  
  --
  Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
9. Re:Something smells funny over there by tottenham18 · 2017-08-27 23:15 · Score: 2
  
  Alvaro, thank you for the comments. I'm glad that I've been able to come away from this with some good feature ideas.
  
  I've actually got to scoot (dog walking, exercise, you know the drill) so I'll keep this short, but the idea of a centralised governing body is a very good one. To some degree this has developed naturally, for instance hard rules to the system that can't be broken, i.e. projects which don't match the site get rejected by the approval process which we do. E.g. if someone's going on there to build something for a business or investors, they're going to get rejected. There's also fixed ranges for the parameters of the settings, task contribution points etc. etc. so there's only so much flexibility in the model. I'll also have a think about how a ubiquitous cpt allocation across all projects will benefit the system as whole. At the moment I'm not entirely convinced that local bubbles of cpt "value" will lead to unfairness. But I'll have a think. The idea of templates is something that could work either way, providing a structure and a foundation for projects to understand the value of contributions, rather than leaving it at an arbitrary 1 unit of time = 1 cpt.
  
  For any project, contributor or owner having problems, there's a dedicated panic button that automatically invites me into a chat - albeit under a different, support focussed account named "Gandalf" - where I can mediate any issues, bring about a verdict or just help out with understanding different features. So while it's not a system that acts as a central, governing body, I can if need be act as one myself and enforce a particular course of action if the project needs it desperately.
  
  As per your suggestion I'll also work on making the message clearer, that it's not a platform for accessing the labour market and is for technicals primarily. I'll also certainly look into better voting models, it's without doubt that any voting system can be exploited. It might be a case of reacting as we go or completely redefining the system.
  
  Anyway, I really do appreciate the feedback.
  Mike
10. Re:Something smells funny over there by CustomSolvers2 · 2017-08-27 23:30 · Score: 2
  
  Anyway, I really do appreciate the feedback.
  Happy to help and to confirm that you have the kind of adaptable and reasonable attitude which is certainly required to accomplish what you want. I will keep an eye on your site and might give it a shot at some point.
  
  --
  Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
So... 100% money oriented? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 05:44 · Score: 0

If it 100% focused on a way to distribute money, how can you say its non-money oriented?
Call it what it is already. by geekmux · 2017-08-27 06:11 · Score: 4, Insightful

Asking people to donate their time and efforts in lieu of pay is called a charity.
At the end of the day, your donated efforts will line someone's pocket. You're either cool with that or you're not, but enough of the Millennial-flavored marketing bullshit trying to label this as crowd-something simply because it involves more than one human.
1. Re:Call it what it is already. by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 07:04 · Score: 1
  
  Charity? You're too kind. I'm not. It's utter bullshit.
2. Re: Call it what it is already. by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 09:18 · Score: 0
  
  "The last part of the quote (from Reddit) which got cut: "...At the moment Iâ(TM)m hoping that on every sale thereâ(TM)ll be a cut of about 10% before transaction costs so that 90% of all sales revenue is going to the project contributors - with no extra, hidden costs. This could change though, depending on costs."."
  Seems pretty fair to me considering Apple/Google etc take a substantially higher percentage (although their marketplace does provide some added benefit).
3. Re:Call it what it is already. by tottenham18 · 2017-08-27 18:28 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Hi,
  
  I'm the creator of the site. I'm guessing from your comment that it's not clear that contributors get paid. Just wanted to clarify that the profits are distributed based off of contribution whether they're the creator of a project or a contributor. Better yet, everyone's contribution is valued at the same level so irrespective of what you're contributing with your time, the money you earn for that "unit" of time will be the same as everyone else. It's essentially a rev-share model weighted by contribution.
  
  Hope this clears stuff up.
What the HELL are you talking about?! by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 06:35 · Score: 0

"It pays well, jobs are plentiful, and anybody can learn to program, for free, in their spare time."
Eeeeeeeeeeh...?!
1. Re:What the HELL are you talking about?! by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 07:12 · Score: 0
  
  Jobs are plentiful for H1Bs, veterans, minorities, women, and obese retards (hi creimer).
  White man, no job for you.
2. Re:What the HELL are you talking about?! by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 10:13 · Score: 0
  
  Who is "creimer"?
Logic of the clueless by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 06:38 · Score: 1

His comment just goes to show how the GPL and its supporters don't care about freedom.
By your very blinkered logic, countries which espouse freedom should permit murder, because disallowing murder is a clear restriction on someone's freedom.
Well you probably won't be able to comprehend this, but many things that are considered civilized and ethically sound entail a restriction of freedom, in exchange for which society gains a benefit. This is what raises primitive societies out of a state of self-centered barbarism and towards the state of cooperative existence that we call civilization.
The GPL promotes behavior which benefits the public good, in exchange for disallowing your freedom to benefit only yourself when distributing modified code. If you object to this then it says more about your self-centered values and poor code of ethics than anything else.
Same here & why I've did ones like... apk by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 09:43 · Score: 0

See subject: Recruiters told me same as I worked 4 others (no longer) & I did APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-7 32/64-bit https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=%22APK+Hosts+File+Engine%22+and+%22start64%22&btnG=Google+Search&gbv=1/
Ads/script/malware rob speed/security/privacy/bandwidth.
Hosts add speed (hardcodes/adblocks), security (bad sites/malware/poisoned dns), reliability (dns down), & anonymity (dns requestlogs/trackers).
Less power/cpu/ram + IO use vs. DNS/routers/addons/antivirus + less security bugs/complexity & faster vs. addons/routers/remote dns!
Avoids DNSChangers in routers/IP settings & dns redirect (99.999% of ISP DNS != patched vs. it) + DNS requestlog tracking & lighten DNS load & resolve faster from local RAM!
* Via what u NATIVELY have in a FASTER kernelmode IP stack!
APK
P.S. - Safe https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/e01211ca36aa02e923f20adee0a3c4f5d5187dc65bdf1c997b3da3c2b0745425/analysis/1433430542/
1. Re:Same here & why I've did ones like... apk by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-27 15:12 · Score: 0
  
  Who would want to hire a fucking Slashdot spammer?
  CAPTCHA: inboard, like APKs testicles!
APK's online portfolio, sucking moose cock by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-28 00:47 · Score: 0

Hate to break it to you APK but continuing to upload youtube videos of yourself sucking moose cock won't get you a job
You've got 1 thing wrong... apk by Anonymous Coward · 2017-08-28 11:51 · Score: 0

See subject: Completely wrong in fact - I haven't had to work for anyone (other than myself) for more than a decade now...
APK
P.S.=> HOWEVER @ year end, to burn others OVER inflated budgets though? I will do consulting gigs (massively overpaid ones & that is the reason why - budget burning)... apk
a rarefied hill to die on by epine · 2017-08-28 14:23 · Score: 1

Better yet, everyone's contribution is valued at the same level so irrespective of what you're contributing with your time, the money you earn for that "unit" of time will be the same as everyone else.
Treating a diverse group of people as inherently "the same" is not a hill I would personally choose to die on.
May the force fit be with you.