@g @jollyrogue @RL_Dane @cobra@fedi.vern.cc @alcinnz
And that's not why it's the end goal—once you have exposure, you still have to harness it with for-profit endeavours. But if you don't have exposure, for-profit projects are going to be useless in most cases.
@benjaminhollon @g @jollyrogue @RL_Dane @cobra So, so, so many people lack the exposure to make a profit. Not saying you should accept exposure in place of money, certainly not from those who can easily afford to pay you. But exposure does have its role to play.
(there's a tangent about requiring money to live being an injustice I'm not wanting to dig into)
@alcinnz So many people lack the resources or time flexibility to work on their business full time so it can get to a point where it can make money.
People being able to work part-time and cover their bills is underrated in economics.
Anyway, this isn’t about economics. It’s about anticapitalist FOSS licenses.
@benjaminhollon Sales and marketing are the life blood of a business. I agree with that.
I disagree with calculating every single move.
Position 1: Start the business, find sales.
Position 2: Get famous, cash in.
Position 3: Do the work, just because.
Do the thing because it needs to be done or you feel compelled to do it rather then doing it to chase clout.
I believe people should be able to opt out, and licenses are part of that.
@jollyrogue @g @RL_Dane @cobra@fedi.vern.cc @alcinnz
Oh, absolutely. I was more speaking on a *very* rough guideline of how to license if you are wanting to make money off of what you're doing, but if you don't want to, great for you. I believe in separating projects that you're doing for free and ones you're doing for profit, not trying to do some odd combo (though there are exceptions).