tfm

That may be true technologically. But if the economics don't add up it's a bubble.

Why do you assume the developer has to implement what could be paid for?

If 80% of your income comes from a single company that pays you to develop the features they want, can you afford to decline specific requests without risking that client? Probably not. Without income diversification, you can quickly end up in a situation where your client dictates your work.

Why is the assumption that devs will give up agency?

Because financial dependence limits choice. When a developer relies on just a few clients, those clients gain leverage over them, making it difficult to turn down requests, even if they’d prefer to.

And why the assumption that all paid requests will be by corporations?

Because private individuals rarely spend hundreds or thousands of dollars to get a feature implemented. A more realistic approach for individual users would be crowdfunding or pooling resources to fund specific features.

Then corporations will decide even more where open source projects are going. If you pay me you decide where the project is going, not me.

However, if core development is unrelated to my income, I have full control over it's fate and don't need to implement what's in the interest of some shitty corporation.

When the image of "Nicole" is loaded, your computer/phone connects to another server and transfers your IP address. But it currently looks like it's not that big of a problem. Still a fix will be implemented soon to prevent this.

This would break a lot of sites

Thanks! Completely overlooked that

And democracy probably

Have you talked with a therapist?

That's pretty optimistic

I think it's some powder you mix with water and heat up.

Does it really matter? Many laboratories around the world experiment with highly dangerous viruses and that one leaked. Not that I like it but it's still a fact.

Hmm do you have a link to docs for that? 🤔