rglullis

Yeah, you are right. Looks like no one was subscribed from my instance, so it is not getting updated. If I go there directly, there are more posts.

There is no fundamental problem in working for free either. It's second-order effects that we should worry about. Those who are "working for free" because they "just want have software being used by people" are diluting the value of the professionals and in the long term end up being as detrimental as professional designers or photographers who "work for exposure".

If you ask me, the reason that is so hard to fund FOSS development is not because of bureaucracies, but because we are competing with privileged developers who are able to afford giving away their work for free.

I'm pretty sure that I got paid to work on GPL software, and I am pretty sure that said software would never have been developed if I wasn't going to be paid for it.

What I don’t like is that the title minimizes the contributions of the MIT developers.

It's not about the contribution. The MIT license still lets people study and share the code. It's Free Software. The contribution is still there. The "problem" is that those contributions can be taken and exploited by large corporations.

You answer are reasonable justifications for why MIT is used, but they also work pretty well to illustrate the title of the post: If you are doing MIT, you are working for free. If you are working with GPL, you are working for freedom.

GPL means big corporations just won’t use it.

Great. No corporation is working on software for the freedom of its users.

they will just search for an alternative or make their own.

Or pay the developer to dual license, which can and should be the preferred way for FOSS developers to fund their work?

Would you be interested in coming over to !jets@nfl.community? Now with football season starting the instance is going to be one of my main focal points to work on the new Fediverser features.

No, the LW one is even more dead. No posts for almost an year.

It's a string of my own posts at !nba@nba.space, even though we are on week of the finals and the Celtics are close to winning their first ring since 2008.

I was thinking of breaking main into !news, !highlights and !talk. Football@soccer seems a bit redundant (and schizophrenic in terminology)

You have higher costs as you manage 10+ instances.

The costs of running the instances is sunk already, because I run them on the same infra that I use for my projects, and it's not a couple of hundred dollars per month that is going to make or break things for me. The worst case scenario is "I go back to a full-time job and Communick becomes yet-again a side-project/hobby". The case where any of these instances become big enough to the point that it demands more from me is better than any of the current situation.

(begware is) another model that can also work (most of the instances have celebrated their first birthday recently).

I honestly don't see it this way. Activity through the network has been abysmal. Operating an instance at this level should be incredibly easy, but even then we have things like bigger instances having issues with lack of moderators, basic federation issues between the larger instances mostly because of network latency... all that show that we should be collectively putting a lot more resources into this if we truly want to have a credible alternative to Reddit and Facebook Groups.

If anything happened to the most popular 10 instances, Lemmy would probably die overnight.

I don't want to sound too pessimistic, but Lemmy feels pretty much dead already. My feed is mostly content from the communities that I've been posting + the two of three stubborn users (like yo)u who have been trying as hard as possible to make something out of it.

Then can we do it with one, maybe?

Instance management is a much more important commitment than moderation, though.

Do you want any more commitment than a business running 10+ instances for almost a year now? Paying $1000+ per year on the domains alone?

Forgive my bluntness, but it seems that the fact that Communick is (or tries to be) a for-profit venture bothers you?