Calling FOSS devs "competitors" is such a corporate-minded statement that completely misses the point. FOSS devs all work together to achieve a common goal and don't see other projects as competitors, they see them as friends.
Comrade, thank you for correcting the record. The word "competitor" has been retired from the lexicon effective immediately. All FOSS developers are friends. All FOSS developers have always been friends. Anyone who remembers otherwise will be assisted by the Ministry of Love in recovering the correct memory.
Competition for non-monetary resources is absolutely a thing. Developer time is scarce and other projects can absolutely see others as competitors in this regard. We have plenty of stories of project forks sprouting because of frustration/disagreement/etc and the new fork starts gathering more attention/contributions because of better governance, better devx, saner environment, etc.
Yes, but this is not a case of project hard fork, not even a soft fork. They are two completely unrelated projects.
People contributing to KDE would probably not contribute to Gnome for a variety of reasons - and vice versa - and it's perfectly fine. One aspect of open source is biodiversity.
I agree, that what I literally tried to qualify it... Goddamn some of you seem to write comments with the sole purpose to disagree with the smallest of things.
And don't you think its a strawman to compare only being and to install "" approved "" ($100/year for apple) software to a seatbelt? There is no use case for not wearing a seatbelt. That is not true for being able to install software.
Plenty of people disagree that there is no use case to not wearing a seatbelt. That you find it impossible to imagine makes it an even better analogy actually.
People can disagree with whatever, everyone is allowed to be stupid.
But most reasonable people agree there's no tangible use case to not wearing a seatbelt. There are infinite tangible use cases to using software outside the app store, that reasonable people can all acknowledge.
Then go ahead and use one. Of course, most projects in this regard try to tackle multiple things (e.g. Tor), including DNS, but there are projects like OpenNIC that take on DNS alone if you prefer. As usual, the mass majority won't adopt these, but they are ready to use for anyone who wants them.
Because I don't disagree with that premise at all but am forced to play by these bullshit rules? I wish I didn't have to, but if I want my website to exist and continue to have any sort of audience, I have to play by those bullshit rules. The alternative to no API access isn't "more decentralisation", the alternative is absolutely no human curation what so ever, as that process tends to require some sort of API-powered tools to wade through the (nowadays >30% AI-generated) noise.
Here's like the dumbest use case: say you have a hundred artists you wanted to follow and be notified whenever they release any new music, without any of it slipping through the cracks because of "the algorithm" and without any sort of preference towards the most mainstream subset of those 100 artists. Once you already have an established brand and have crossed some sort of an arbitrary, almost always non-transparent threshold of clout, there are dozens of ways for you to do that. Hell, Apple will reach out to pay you to plug into their API and use their embed above everyone else's. But while you're a nobody, even this trivial use case from a technical perspective is made virtually impossible because you can't get access to any sort of API to simply plug into.
Anyways, not much of a problem to me any more as I can easily prove my side project reaches a six figure amount of people every month with no advertising, but I promise you it would be a problem to you if you ever decided to try build anything even remotely music-related.
reply