451 sats \ 4 replies \ @BitByBit21 17 Nov 2023 freebie \ on: The Lack of Compensation in Open Source Software is Unsustainable bitcoin
I like this idea:
I'm not a developer myself but being a professional translator for 20+ years I have contributed in a number of OSS projects as a translator for the last 2 years.
I think translation is even more undervalued so we see a lot of poor localizations (at least in Spanish) which sometimes can be even misleading.
Of course developers play a more important role but a big part of the success of their projects relies on the ability to reach wide audiences in a trusted manner.
I know that some of the projects I've contributed to have good financial support but all the money go to developers and designers even if translators contribute on a regular/voluntary basis.
Maybe it would be a good idea to integrate these OSS projects with Nostr and use some kind of zap splitting so that it includes all contributors. For instance, this is kind of the approach of Amethyst for every new release.
Translators get a raw deal everywhere. It's only relatively recently when you can even figure out who the translator is on most books.
It's interesting to hear you say that coders and designers get the love and support. My assumption was that code is relatively rewarding, and relatively easy for someone to work on by themselves, and to combine that work with the larger group; whereas design was much harder to apportion, more heavily front-loaded, hard to decompose, etc., and so relatively a thankless and difficult job in OSS. Do you have a different perspective?
(This is also why I was curious if there were btc design types in this SN post about Spiral's recent doings. @moneyball, @art, @gbks, any insights on this? Did I get it wrong?)
reply
In relation to designers I was referring to some particular projects, so maybe this is not always the case...
reply
What a big topic. I'll just share some general thoughts.
In terms of total funding, you have to keep in mind the ratios of designer to developer. Based on this research, a 1:10 designer to developer ratio is common. For researchers, it's even less, and I assume for translators as well (open-source might be a bit different than in companies, but probably somewhat close). That also means the amount and sources of funding for those specializations is smaller and harder to find, and it can feel like there's underrepresentation (which there might actually be). I hope we can help with design representation in that area with the newly founded Bitcoin Design Foundation.
As far as being harder to decompose, I think that doing the work in public and documenting it well goes a long way. For example, I do that on my weekly update. Signaling your plans, showing the actual work-in-progress and output, no one can argue that you didn't do worthwhile work. It also helps get input and buy-in along the way. But it's a skill that has to be learned and not everyone is comfortable being so public. Either way, you're more likely to get compensated if you can make a good case for your contributions.
reply
Thanks for your input and for sharing those interesting data. You raise some interesting points and I'm happy to know that designers are leading the way. I totally agree that we should be more proactive and vocal to show why our work is valuable too.
reply