[geodel]

Thats the way world works. Here in this forum so many software people asking for best possible salaries and perks, and when it comes paying a bit to good productivity software same developers are always full of excuses like.

1) Oh, I prefer open source alternative for ideological reason.

2) This software is not really worth that much.

3) Hectoring developers every single time in providing why their software should be preferred over unpaid alternatives.

4) Blaming companies that they are bigger users so they should pay not me.

If these entitled developers who deserve all the money but no one deserve their money just shut the fuck up every once in a while it will be a good thing.

[jayd16]

It's important to remember that a community is not a single minded entity. It's members can hold many contradicting beliefs, while each individual is ideologically consistent.

This shouldn't be unexpected and it's not an excuse to be dismissive to an imagined hypocrite. Not saying there aren't hypocrites in this world, just that we shouldn't treat members of a community as some kind of superset of everything in that community.

[hitekker]

It's the upvote where that opinion falls short. Sure, it may just be one hypocrite, but it sure is funny when a community raises scarcely concealed hypocrisy to the top comments or sub-comments. And then forgets about it 2 weeks later.

[geodel]

Its not unexpected and neither is Oracle's approach unexpected still its worth talking about.

Besides I made observation about people in community and not community itself as I did not say HN thinks software should not be paid for.

[sangnoir]

> Besides I made observation about people in community[...]

Can you link any specific HN user who holds any 3 of those specific beliefs, or was this hypocritical strawman purpose-built to bolster your argument?

[vlovich123]

It's important to remember that a company is not a single minded entity. It's members can hold many contradicting beliefs, while each individual is ideologically consistent.

[jayd16]

They often do have a hierarchical command structure and that should entail some top down consistency and some accountability rolling upwards but you're not wrong.

Believing every employee at Walmart thinks the same is silly and while someone is to blame for policy its important to not blame retail clerks for store policy, for example.

[talldayo]

I mean, sometimes the entitled developers are right and predict that the monetization of a software product will lead to it's inevitable demise. More often than not that's how these sorts of projects end up.

Linux as a whole exists because developers said "fuck AT&T, we're taking this train off the rails" and nobody ever looked back since.

[scarface_74]

And the majority of code in Linux is created by corporate employees getting paid to make changes. Those companies are merely helping to “commoditize their complements”

[talldayo]

That's not really a problem as long as the source license stays the same. If Amazon or Microsoft need a feature in the kernel, nobody tends to care as long as it's GPL.

> Those companies are merely helping to “commoditize their complements”

That's how they justify it internally, yeah. From an administrative standpoint it's pretty obvious that they all choose Linux because it's easier than retrofitting proprietary UNIX for modern software. But indeed, they market it as goodwill and complimentary development.

[wcedmisten]

I think you may have misinterpreted the parent comment. "Complement" as in a complementary good in economics terms. Not "complimentary", as in free. There's a good article on this by Joel Spolsky

https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy-letter-v/