pull down to refresh
154 sats \ 1 reply \ @Scoresby OP 3h \ parent \ on: What 30k Free Users Taught Me About Charging $10/Month | Hacker News tech
I wonder if the "people don't like to pay for software" phenomenon is the same as tragedy of the commons.
I remember being all too willing to pay for software when I was a kid (the day I bought Warcraft 2 was one of the best days of my childhood, closely followed by Command and Conquer Red Alert, Civ III, and Unreal Tournament).
Since adulthood, I really haven't paid for any software. Everything I use is free. People just magically do the work of maintaining it for me -- which seems completely unsustainable.
I can see how some of the big projects like ubuntu are able to make a business out of support, or maybe a SAAS model, but smaller software projects seem to mostly be hoping for an acquisition (this is my ignorant outsider's view).
I wonder if it is a little like writing. There is so much writing out there, it is not necessary for people to pay for it much anymore. The solution for writers seems to be a patronage model or getting hired by a company to garner attention for them or to build some following which they can monetize.
The big difference that I see between writing and open source software is that software needs to be maintained. Writing is more like fire and forget. I suppose writers need to maintain their audiences...
Whatever the case, I would love to see more conversation about how Bitcoin ecosystem projects can make more money and be sustainable.
Unreal Tournament
If I had a sat for each second spent in Facing Worlds...
My whole thesis on it is that only business software and entertainment software is monetizable... Business because you can embed yourself into leverage building processes such that things become indispensable... Ubuntu is monetized through services to business whom have invested in other processes built on top of it, they aren't paying Canonical in their mind, they're maintaining their own infrastructure.
Games vary in monetized dynamics, but even that had to evolve with online-ness since cracked torrents and CD burners became a big problem.
Bitcoin software doesn't really have either of those levers because the whole point of using Bitcoin is that you don't need the license key or credentials for the game / SaaS / Professional Services.
We see so many companies doing custody and swaps because that covers literally every (the majority) user that are indifferent to those non-monetizable properties.
This might best explain a lot of my views on Bitcoin software generally,
- That Core should be treated like Enterprise or SCADA software... non-breaking above all and infrequently updated because the surface is minimal.
- That the Lightning shell is the highest leverage point from which to push on overall adoption, Circular-MoE, and self-custodial use. That's all in one place because it's where people can actually treat Bitcoin (and Bitcoin software) as part of their revenues.
Note how that Lightning.Video, ShockWallet with its Nostr Offers and Lightning.Pub Dashboard, all using Sanctum to manage identity in organizational settings, are a stack of tools a business could use to build and scale their revenue.
reply