Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


This user doesn't have any awards

About PocketNerd

  • Title

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Somewhere in Canuckistan

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Well, I guess it's time to give Rakuten a try. Not that Honey helped me much anyway.
  2. Of course Algorithms are biased. They're created by Humans, which are inherently biased by nature.
  3. The obvious answer is to enforce jaywalking bans by lining sidwalks with electric fences :P
  4. I would love to contribute to things but literally cannot afford to do so. That is perhaps the heart of my beef with Open Source and FOSS.
  5. The "slaves" in that comparison are contributors to FOSS projects that don't get paid.
  6. Kinda like how slavers used get rich off of slaves and some slaves (not all) also benefited. See how you sound?
  7. We'll just agree to disagree at this point. I see the problems with it and you choose to ignore them, just because it works in some cases.
  8. Me too, all I have is observations as I've worked in-and-out of software dev. But there doesn't seem to be any real studies (or my google-fu isn't good enough for this). Already did, isn't it well known that Wikipedia isn't a trusted source? What wikipedia says and how others interpret are two completely different things. See also: " That is, anyone is free licensed to use, copy, study, and change the software in any way ". Take special note of the word use, can't be freely used if you offer a price for it! Ideal world vs Reality argument, can't take it seriously.
  9. Not according to the definition I've been given when discussing this subject with others, "freedom" includes free monetarily. Major != All. Also, given the trend of software being offered for free, the number of available projects where, to use your terms, "Major" contributors can get paid as a day job is not meeting the number of available developers.
  10. Then, by definition, it's OSS, not FOSS. And that doesn't make me wrong. Sure people contribute out of passion, but in order to do that someone else has to be paying their bills. Which shows a level of priviledge AND a willingness to exploit if that project doesn't pay them while making revenue (either through direct sales or through selling related services) And I agree, the gaming industry has a big exploitation problem.
  11. Sure, there's examples of FOSS products/devs that make $$. But largely that's not the case, especially when you start looking at individual contributors (paid staff doesn't really count, here). And it really can't, by nature. How can you pay contributors when you offer your product for free?
  12. Is it just me, or do the slashed prices still seem needlessly high?