thraxil.org:

bounties

by anders pearson Wed 03 Dec 2003 15:06:06

i'm really fascinated with the recent <a href="http://www.gnome.org/bounties/">gnome</a> and <a href="http://www.markshuttleworth.com/bounty.html">mozilla</a> bounties. i think the idea of offering bounties for development of open source code has a lot of potential. if they opened things up so other users could contribute to the bounties, it might work even better. by myself i probably don't have enough money to really make it worth anyone hacking in a feature that i really want, but if there are others like me, each willing to contribute to a bounty, we could probably come up with a decent amount of cash. one very apt criticism of open source software is that the programmers tend to work on things that programmers care about or are fun to work on. end users' needs are often secondary. a nice bounty system could really improve this situation, letting actual users of the software vote with cash on what features are actually important to them. plus it helps programmers who want to work on open source code generate some income without having to sell out or get a day job. the whole free-market approach might also help to shake off the open source community's 'commie' image in the eyes of the hardcore capitalists who insist that proprietary software must be inherently better because it has monetary incentive. but it does it without actually giving up any of the advantages of open source. of course there are all kinds of practical problems to be overcome to make it actually work, but i'm confident that it's possible. even without an infrastructure in place i still think that large companies and governments should look into directly funding open source projects. the US government must spend millions each year on windows licenses. if they came up with a list of issues that are actually preventing them from switching to linux and presented it to the open source community saying "we're about to give microsoft $X million dollars. if you can fix these issues, we'll instead give you that $X/2 million dollars." they would save a lot of money, and the whole world would benefit from the improved software. since microsoft operates on <a href="http://www.computerweekly.com/Article117557.htm">85% profit margins</a>, it shouldn't be hard for the government and maybe a few big corporations to come up with enough to fund the actual development of what they need. honestly, i think that these kinds of models, if implemented well, have a greater long-term viability than the current commercial software industry. open source projects don't need the overhead of an advertising department or overpaid executives.
TAGS: software economics open source bounties

comments

while I do agree with most of what you said I do have a couple comments...doing anything which appeals to "hardcore capitalists" needs to be carefully considered...and yes, if this system is implemented well it would be wonderful, much like communism; but due to the inevitable bad apples that would find a way to manipulate the system it would probably follow a similar path...

that's what i was talking about with practical problems that need to be overcome. the infrastructure needs to be resilient against abuse, but i don't think it would be that hard. some kind of escrow system could ensure that nobody backs out and screws everyone else. really, it isn't much more difficult of a problem than what eBay faces. you've just got to make sure that one side ponies up the money that they promised and the other comes up with the code. it's just eBay with multiple buyers for a single item.

the only other way of abusing it that i can think of is if a programmer has the code working but keeps it secret and waits on releasing it to let the bounty get higher. the risk of another programmer claiming the bounty before them might be enough incentive to prevent this, or some kind of time based incentive could be added to compensate; eg, payers could commit on a schedule ("i'll contribute $100 if it's added in the next month, $50 if it's added in the next two months, or $10 if it takes longer than two months").

I'm not so much worried about people backing out of payments and screwing people over in that manner, I was more thinking that corporations would somehow find a way to screw people over using the system legitimately...I just think back to somewhere around middle school where we got our first formal definition of capitalism and it actually sounded like a good thing; competition makes products better and drives prices down...blah blah blah...and nothing about how it ends up screwing over the vast majority of people forced to live under the system. I think right now we're looking at kind of an eigth grade-type definition of this bounty system and I'm concerned about what implications we might run into by the time we're out of college...that all being said, i am a big fan of getting paid for something i'd probably do in my spare time anyway...


on a completely unrelated note, but i'm thinking about it so i might as well bring it up now...why is your comment (which was after mine) not listed first in the most recent comments drop-down? Not that it matters a whole lot...just curious...

also...aesthetically, adding an extra "Re: " to the subject line for every reply isn't that pleasing...the subject is "bounties" my post is regarding "bounties" it isn't "regarding regarding regarding bounties"...just a thought...

i think that the simple requirement that all work done be released under a GPL/BSD/MPL type license would go a long way toward preventing corporate abuse. it might not be perfect, but i can't imagine it being worse than the current situation.


the order of the comments is a little screwed up because the times are off. at some point a while back, i upgraded postgresql to a new version that handles timezone related stuff differently and i've been too lazy to change my code.

i would have thought that it had something to do with the time zones except we're in the same time zone...ah well, laze on it's not killing anyone :-)


formatting is with Markdown syntax. Comments are not displayed until they are approved by a moderator. Moderators will not approve unless the comment contributes value to the discussion.

namerequired
emailrequired
url
remember info?