The answer can be found by looking at how most of the commercial open source products are monetized. Software hosting and technical support are quite lucrative if the software is valuable.

This only applies to some software, though, no? Like, let’s say a group of folks make a game or something, and release it as FOSS. Assuming they’re not hobbyists, and this is their career, how are they covering costs and making a living on that?

How do content creators get paid?

Largely through sponsorships, I think, right? Sponsorships and crowdfunding, but both of those require some measure of notoriety. It’s an unfortunate case where you have to spend a lot of effort doing it effectively unpaid until you get a following large enough to bring in sponsorship money or ad revenue or donations. Or you need to be a pretty woman who’s willing to monetize that, that seems to have a much lower barrier to entry.

Out of curiosity, under this system, how do the people writing the software get paid? Are they all dependent on donations?

If I were the victim of genocide, I wouldn’t be a voter at all, because I’d be dead. However, that’s kind of irrelevant - are you the victim of genocide? I’m assuming not, if you’re voting in the US election. Even if you’re Palestinian, your people are the victim of genocide, but unless you’re in Palestine, you aren’t.

That said, if you are Palestinian, I feel for you, I honestly do, and it would explain your view somewhat.

I think we can both agree that there’s only two outcomes that’re possible in this election: Trump wins, or Harris wins. (If you don’t agree, I’d be happy to hear your third outcome.) If you truly believe there’s no difference between the two of them, you need to do some research on the topic, because there are a lot of differences, even if they don’t pertain to this issue specifically.

If, between the two of them, you hope Harris wins, a 3rd party vote is voting against your interests. If you hope Trump wins between the two of them, a 3rd party vote is still voting against your interests, because you’re effectively taking a vote away from your preferred candidate among the two who could possibly win.

Edit to respond to your edit:

The outcome is the Democrats stop committing Genocide or they don’t get votes. “But Trump” isn’t even an argument.

Unless you’re out there protesting, or writing letters, or making phone calls, or in some way letting them know that their policy is costing them your vote, it’s a useless gesture. Posting on Lemmy isn’t going to change any politician’s minds. It’s not even going to change anyone’s mind here, in all likelihood. If you actually want to make a difference, you need to make your voice heard by the people whose minds you’re actually trying to change.

I don’t think it’s a waste of time. Even if I can’t convince him specifically, there are other people reading these posts. If someone came to this thread who was less sure, and I can change their mind, that’s good enough for me.

Well, I’m not a single-issue voter.

I’m not rewarding them for anything, but I accept that it’s possible to oppose one policy a politician has, even a very important one, and at the same time support a lot of other policies they have, while also vehemently opposing almost all policies that their opponent supports, and make my choice based on that information.

Based on this post, you seem to be a single-issue voter, though, so I’m trying to understand what you’re hoping the outcome is. You acknowledge that a vote that supports Trump, even indirectly, is not helping the people of Gaza, so why would you vote against your own self-interests? What’s your goal?

If your goal is to show opposition to what’s happening in Gaza, there’s much more effective ways to do that. Get out there and protest - the protests at the DNC are getting a lot of news coverage, that’s where your activism could actually make a difference. Not here.

A normally blue voter voting 3rd party is indirectly helping Trump win the election. Do you think Trump’s Israel policy is going to be better than Harris’s?

So, what course of action are you proposing? Vote Trump? Vote 3rd party? Don’t vote?

What’s your intended / expected outcome?

I want a FO or TES game that’s just a modder playground.

• Build the world, don’t populate it with anything.
• Divide the world into a grid, let modders submit mods to a central database and register them with the grid squares they alter.
• Let the game download an assortment of mods (maybe using user-defined tags to preference certain content) that fills out the world, using their grid square registration system to ensure no overlapping / conflicting content.)
• Let players rate content they play.
• Reward the modders who made popular content in some way.

Obviously there’s a lot of glaring problems with this, but in my head, it’d be awesome.

This whole thing seems so weird. Why is Meta using the courts to enforce their ToS, anyway? Theoretically, the penalty for a user violating Meta’s terms would be Meta closing that user’s account. Unless the lawsuits are just frivolous scare tactics intended to drain the defendant’s resources…

That’s on average 57 per day, or 3.5 per hour if we assume 16 hours a day awake. Seems likely he just automated the process somehow, or that multiple people were making reports under his name. Or he was just submitting a report every 17 waking minutes for the entire year. Who knows.

“Hey, can you recommend a good free photoshop alternative?”

“DIE!”

Just like the good old Jraphics Interchange Format!

Plus as an added bonus we can have the ‘gif’ pronunciation disagreement!

“It’s as fun as Marvel Rivals!” could become the new face of apathy and sarcasm.

This is just asking for a new law declaring dying in prison punishable by life in prison.

You can hear it directly from Arnold Schwarzenegger.

You encounter the merchant where you can buy the MTX stuff in the first few hours of the game. You can’t even use the majority of them before reaching that point.

I would honestly bet money that they’d designed the game to not have microtransactions, then some executive at the 11th hour told them to find a way to include them, and they made them inconsequential as a sort of malicious compliance. Not that I think it’s OK to have them in the first place, it really soured me on the game initially. I think it’s considerably worse for including them, but they are completely meaningless.

It’d honestly be hilarious if all the creators just started rebranding their fan projects with Palworld Pals (or any other similar IP). Start shifting the discourse away from Pokemon. I’d love that.

There were arrows? If only there was something in the image to indicate where they are, I might not have missed them.

Others have already mentioned RoR and DRG; VT2 and Borderlands also have mods that support at least 8 and I think up to 16 players.

I think EDF is the only one that definitely doesn’t; I was mis-remembering how many can play that, I guess. Thought it was 5 or 6.