|
to be fair, lots of software has value. it's just software that has strong open-source competitors that doesn't this is not a counter argument, obviously
|
![]() |
|
![]()
|
# ¿ May 17, 2022 06:53 |
|
ngl I think open-source contributions are one of those things that people think is necessary but generally aren't. in all the interviewing I've done, I've never made any sort of decision based on that. it's the same as having patents - cool if it's there, sure, but in no way necessary (or even important) at least, I know that resume-building motivated a lot of my FOSS stuff, but realistically it didn't do a ton for me. conference presentations that came from FOSS tools I wrote probably did 10x more, and all they did was give me something to talk about. my FOSS contributions (esp the ones they turned into conference talks) have forced me to learn poo poo that makes me a good candidate and enables me to do well on interviews, but the actual releases and contributions and stuff aren't the important part. the important part is that I know more about x than most people, not that I wrote a tool to exploit x I generally agree with the paper, and generally think the argument re: devaluing is valid. I just don't think that it's sound. of course, it is certainly sound for some dumbass orgs - just not for the software industry as a whole, in my experience. it's also worth mentioning that FOSS is a great way to learn things from people with experience. just _having_ problems to work on with built-in userbases is extremely helpful for people who want to learn. much more so than coursera or whatever.
|
![]() |
|
rotor posted:cobra farms but for lovely single-liner js packages im gonna need to hear more about this analogy
|
![]() |
|
thanks! i cottoned on to the meaning but really wanted the story behind it. did not disappoint
|
![]() |
|
MononcQc posted:
oh my god i loving hate this writing style so much im angry about writing
|
![]() |