Yeah man, screw the VCs! That’s why we’re communicating through an open source platform… oh.
Well at least this site isn’t created by a VC… oh.
Things are nuanced. VCs can fund valuable useful things sometimes.
Well at least this site isn’t created by a VC… oh.
Things are nuanced. VCs can fund valuable useful things sometimes.
HN has monetary value to someone somewhere. Plus it’s cheap to run.
It’s also a good advertising and recruiting platform for YC.
There by the grace of VCs goes HN.
We say screw to fooling your users that you're an OSS adopter and supporter, just until your project is big and you can say screw OSS.
The old code is there with the existing license still. Fork it and move on.
People, man.
There’s no issue here. Just whining. There is no lock in at all.
Even if it were OSI open source the maintainers like the very thread we are in could die. Then what? Oh you fork and maintain yourself, or the project rots.
License changes are irrelevant.
Amazon can wrap an open source project in an AWS front end and create a paid for cloud service off the back of community effort. Or, key contributors can decide they want to take the existing code and change the license their contributions are released under going forward.
If the original license allows both these things to happen, then both are a risk and no one is being fooled.
I would love nothing more than for a project I built or contributed to wound up as an AWS service.
Writing the code is just part of the value, running it is also very difficult. Especially as the use increases and expose new code paths and bugs and what not.
What they can't - without giving the middle finger to OSS - is satisfy greed.
If you want to satisfy greed, fine, but be like Oracle. Sell a commercial license upfront. Don't pretend to be OSS.
The greedy people behind businesses managing OSS are concerned, because they are not satisfied with making money. They want to be THE ONLY ONES making LUDICROUS profits on top of community contributions.