Sarah Drinkwater
@sarahdrinkwater
Knowledge beachcomber interested in the ownership economy, flourishing communities, ecosystem building, magic, and knowledge as an end to itself.
Sarah Drinkwater
Open Source Software and Collective ownership, Coops, and User Owned Platforms
I would argue that this is roughly the state of "open source" today. It is the modern software developer’s marmelade, with the OSI as our Konfitürenverordnung, continuing to aggressively enforce a phrase that has since evolved in the popular vernacular.
"open source" is not the logical negation of "closed source"
Open source is a development methodology; free software is a social movement.
Now that Open Source is heavily depended on by nearly every commercial company, we’re running into sustainability and maintainability problems. These are problems that really didn’t exist at scale before. A very famous recent example of this is the XZ Utils backdoor exploit, where an open source maintainer accepted a subtle but significant compromise from a bad actor, partially due to burnout and harassment of the maintainer.
However, I see this in nearly every maintainer that I talk to. It’s almost impossible to make money by writing and maintaining Open Source software, due to several factors. Everyone wants and expects free shit, and nobody feels that they need to support the people making this all possible.
The strange new truth is that most open source developers and maintainers are now patronized by large corporations.
What would be more ideal is to have not one company paying each developer, which is subject to the whims of corporate KPIs and management changes, but instead to have thousands of companies pay a very small amount to professional maintainers.
The main problem is that there is no good way to do this currently. There is little to no incentive for companies to do this and there are few ways to aggregate and disperse such funding.
The second growing problem in the Open Source ecosystem is the problem of the new generation of Commercial Open Source.
Developers have now been growing up for decades loving Open Source and open communities, and when they start companies and projects, by default they want them to be open. However, there are corporate sustainability issues with Open Source, just as there are with individual maintainer. Somewhat ironically, The Man is now using Open Source licenses to stick it to the developer!
The startup ecosystem is experiencing a series of changes that can't be ignored:- cambrian explosion of funding availability- more value is being created on private markets- going from zero to one is no longer a dark art - ie more talented operators, more infrastructure to build quickly and cheaplyChange is coming to the VC ecosystem. Who will win:... See more
The Three-Body Problem: Finding the New Stable Points in Venture Capital
Productizing venture means taking everything that venture capitalists do — from sourcing companies to evaluating companies to adding value to founders — and using software or networks to do it better.
Erik Torenberg • Productizing Venture
Future of software and AI tooling
One question kept coming up:
Why haven’t incumbent software providers been able to leverage their valuable data assets yet?
Both giants like Salesforce and growth-stage companies with 10+ years of collected data seem to be struggling to deliver truly differentiated AI experiences. Most of us would assume these companies are sitting on data gold mines that should give them a massive advantage. But is that actually true?
One perspective I found compelling: The historical data these companies have collected simply isn't the right kind to make AI models truly effective. The workflow data, outcomes data, or database info they've aggregated over the years might not be as useful as we'd think. What's most valuable in building agentic AI isn't just workflow data or outcomes data—it's a granular understanding of how humans actually perform tasks.
Alternative to What? | Thomas Frank
thebaffler.com
late stage capitalism and “Alternative”
the patina of daring had begun to wear thin on the eighties’ chosen crop of celebrity-rebels. Entire new lines of insolent shoes would have to be designed and marketed; entire new looks and emblems of protest would have to be found somewhere. Consumerism’s traditional claim to be the spokesman for our inchoate disgust with consumerism was hemorrhaging credibility, and independent rock, with its Jacobin ‘authenticity’ obsession, had just the things capital required.
Out went the call for an “alternative” from a thousand executive suites, and overnight everyone even remotely associated with independent rock in Seattle—and Minneapolis, Chapel Hill, Champaign, Lawrence, and finally Chicago—found themselves the recipients of unsolicited corporate attention
