This is where the supply chain metaphor — and it is just that, a metaphor — breaks down. If a microchip vendor enters an agreement and fails to uphold it, the vendor’s customers have recourse. If an open source maintainer leaves a project unmaintained for whatever reason, that’s not the maintainer’s fault, and the companies that relied on their work are the ones who get to solve their problems in the future. Using the term “supply chain” here dehumanizes the labor involved in developing and maintaining software as a hobby.

  • pingveno@lemmy.ml
    4·
    2 years ago

    From what I understand, the GNU philosophy around selling dates from when distribution costs were substantial. Picture manufacturing and distributing CD’s full of packages. It’s just a totally different world now in terms of how software is distributed, free or otherwise.

    • hfkldjbuq@beehaw.org
      1·
      2 years ago

      It’s because rms needed money for remaining relatively independent from influence to implement the free operating system. Sending tapes for some bucks was just a means to that

      https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.html

      it is not a different world. capitalism is still here, and it influences everything including developers ability to maintain their projects, with or without profit-driven influence.